前委任人利益衝突之實質關連性判斷標準

The Substantial Relationship Test for Former-Client Conflicts

利益衝突乃法律倫理之重要議題，其目的不僅在於保護委託人之利益，更是律師忠實義務與保密義務之體現。我國有關前委任人之利益衝突規範，係依《律師法》第 34 條及《律師倫理規範》第 30 條規定，以律師曾受委任或曾與商議而予以贊助者，不得再受具有利害衝突之同一事件與具有實質關聯之事件。然而，在實質關連事件之判斷上，尤以涉及事實複雜之案件時，往往並非顯而易見，仍受有模糊之質疑。於探討我國規範與美國實質關聯事件之「重大相關性」判斷標準及相關案例後，本文以為於界定實質關連事件時，應回歸忠實義務與保密義務之初衷，著重於風險之形成，當律師於前案件獲悉之資訊，將導致後案件中前委任人之重大風險時，除經充分踐行告知義務並獲得書面同意之情形下，應因利害關係衝突而迴避，以維護前後案件當事人利益。

Conflicts of interest is important to lawyer ethics, not only for the protection of the interests of the client, but also for lawyer’s duty of loyalty and confidentiality. According to Article 34 of the Attorney Regulation Act and Article 30 of the Attorney Ethical Rules, which regulates the conflict of interest of former clients, when a lawyers has previously accepted employment or if he has been given counsel to or otherwise rendered assistance to a former client, he shall not represent another person in the same or a substantially related matter unless the former client gives informed consent in writing.However,when determining whether matters are ''ubstantiall related'', the answer is not always clear and intuitive. Focusing on the interest of the former client, the lawyer's duty of loyalty, and the duty of confidentiality, this article holds that a lawyer shall not represent a party whose interest is materially advance to his former client in the case when the information obtained by a lawyer from his former representation might lead to a substantial risk to the former client in a subsequent case.