By Neta, founder of SortMyDivorce · Updated
Search this phrase and you get English, Australian and Emirati law firms answering an entirely different question. Here is the Canadian answer. This guide is for Canada. The word means something materially different in the UK, and something different again in the United States. Both are explained below, because the confusion is the reason nothing useful ranks for this.
| What it is | A lawyer's promise to do something — personally binding on the lawyer who gives it. |
|---|---|
| Governing rule | Rule 7.2-11 of the Code of Professional Conduct, adopted in BC, Ontario and Alberta. |
| The core obligations | "A lawyer must not give an undertaking that cannot be fulfilled" and must "fulfill every undertaking given and honour every trust condition once accepted." |
| Form | "Undertakings should be written or confirmed in writing and should be absolutely unambiguous in their terms." |
| Personal liability | Presumed. If the lawyer does not intend personal responsibility, "this should be stated clearly in the undertaking itself." |
| Breach | Rule 7.1-3(a.1) creates a duty to report a breach of undertaking to the law society. |
| Where you'll meet it | Most often at questioning, when counsel promises to produce a document or answer that could not be given on the day. |
| In the US | The word means a bond or security. Do not import this concept. |
Keeping track of dates like these across a stack of letters is exactly what SortMyDivorce does — start a free trial, no card needed.
An undertaking is a promise given by a lawyer, and it is unusual in law because it binds the lawyer personally rather than their client.
That is what gives it force. When your lawyer undertakes to produce a document, the other side does not have to trust your spouse. They have to trust a professional whose licence is on the line, and who is required to report the breach if it happens.
The Law Society of British Columbia sets out the core obligations under Rule 7.2-11 of the Code of Professional Conduct — a provision adopted in British Columbia, Ontario and Alberta. A lawyer:
must not give an undertaking that cannot be fulfilled. must fulfill every undertaking given and honour every trust condition once accepted.
Two further points from the same guidance matter practically. Undertakings "should be written or confirmed in writing and should be absolutely unambiguous in their terms." And personal responsibility is the default: if a lawyer does not intend to be personally responsible, "this should be stated clearly in the undertaking itself."
Breach is treated seriously. Rule 7.1-3(a.1) establishes a duty to report a breach of undertaking to the law society. This is not a matter the two firms quietly settle between themselves.
This is where most confusion starts, including among people who have been dealing with lawyers for months.
1. The professional or solicitor's undertaking. The general concept above — a lawyer's personally binding promise, enforceable through the law society. It can be about anything: holding funds, releasing a document, registering a transfer, not doing something until a condition is met.
2. The discovery or questioning undertaking. The one you will actually meet in a family matter. During questioning, a party is asked something they cannot answer on the day — a figure they do not have, a document not in the room. Rather than adjourning, counsel undertakes to provide it afterwards. CPLEA, Alberta's public legal education body, describes an undertaking in this setting simply as "a promise a lawyer makes to do something", given when a party agrees to provide follow-up information during questioning.
3. The deemed or implied undertaking rule. Different again, and a source of genuine confusion because it shares the word. This is the principle that evidence obtained through discovery may only be used in that proceeding, not for other purposes. It is a rule about use, not a promise anyone gives.
If someone refers to "the undertakings" in your family matter, they almost certainly mean the second.
Questioning happens. In Alberta this is called questioning — CPLEA notes plainly that it "used to be called discovery." It takes place after affidavits have been exchanged and before trial, with only the parties, their lawyers and a court reporter present. There is no judge. A transcript is produced and filed as evidence.
A question cannot be answered. Someone does not know a figure, does not have a statement to hand, or needs to check with an accountant.
Counsel gives an undertaking. On the record, to provide it afterwards. The court reporter captures it, so it exists in the transcript.
A list is produced. Both sides usually end up with a list of outstanding undertakings, which then has to be worked through.
They are answered — or they are not. This is where undertakings become the practical centre of a disclosure fight. Outstanding undertakings are a documented, dated, professionally-binding record of what was promised and not delivered, which is a considerably stronger position than "they never sent it."
Undertakings given on your behalf are your work. If your lawyer undertakes to produce your corporate financials, you are the one who has to obtain them. An undertaking your own side fails to answer is a professional problem for your lawyer and a credibility problem for you. Ask for the list and work through it promptly.
Undertakings owed to you are trackable. Keep the list, with the date each was given and the date each was answered. This is one of the strongest forms of record in a family file, because it is not correspondence between adversaries — it is a promise made by a professional, recorded in a transcript.
Unanswered undertakings are a real lever. What can be done about them depends on your jurisdiction and your lawyer's judgement, but the starting point is always the same: a dated list of what was promised and not delivered.
Two reasons, and they explain why this article exists.
In England and Wales, an undertaking is a promise given to the court — and in family law specifically it is a domestic violence mechanism. Under section 46 of the Family Law Act 1996, where a court has power to make an occupation order or a non-molestation order, it may accept an undertaking instead. Two limits are built in: "No power of arrest may be attached to any undertaking given under subsection (1)", and under section 46(3A) the court may not accept an undertaking in place of a non-molestation order where the respondent has used or threatened violence and an order is necessary so that a breach can be punished under section 42A.
That is a completely different concept from a Canadian solicitor's undertaking, and it is why UK firms dominate the search results — they are answering a question about protection from violence, not about disclosure.
In the United States, "undertaking" generally means a bond or security. A US divorce lawyer promising to produce documents says they will "supplement our response", "meet and confer", or "stipulate". They do not "give an undertaking."
Verification note. The absence of the Canadian sense from US family practice is a negative finding — we searched for a US family-procedure rule using "undertaking" for a counsel promise to produce, and did not find one. Absence of evidence is weaker than a positive citation. Do not build any US-facing understanding around this word.
Verification note. The absence of the Canadian sense from US family practice is a negative finding — we searched for a US family-procedure rule using "undertaking" for a counsel promise to produce, and did not find one. Absence of evidence is weaker than a positive citation. Do not build any US-facing understanding around this word.
Verification notes. Rule 7.2-11 and Rule 7.1-3(a.1) are cited as set out by the Law Society of British Columbia; the model Code text itself was not read directly. Provincial codes are substantially harmonised but not identical — confirm the rule numbering for your province. The US position is a negative finding as described above.
It binds the lawyer who gives it, personally, and it is enforceable through the law society. The Code requires that every undertaking given be fulfilled, and Rule 7.1-3(a.1) creates a duty to report a breach.
There are mechanisms, and which are available depends on your jurisdiction and the stage of your matter. What is universally useful is a dated list of what was undertaken and what remains outstanding — start there and ask your lawyer what the options are.
Undertakings given during questioning are normally about producing information you hold, so in practice they need your cooperation. Ask your lawyer to confirm the list to you after questioning so that you know what has been promised on your behalf and by when.
The Law Society of BC's guidance is that undertakings "should be written or confirmed in writing and should be absolutely unambiguous in their terms." In questioning, they are captured in the transcript.
No. In England and Wales, particularly in family law, an undertaking is a promise given to the court and is a recognised alternative to certain protective orders under the Family Law Act 1996. Different concept, different purpose, different consequences.
Not in this sense. In US procedure it generally refers to a bond or security. If you are dealing with a US matter, the relevant concepts are discovery obligations and supplementation, not undertakings.
Last reviewed August 2026. Researched and written by Neta, founder of SortMyDivorce. I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice — laws, fees and forms change, so please confirm current details with the official sources above or a local family lawyer.
Upload your lawyer letters and SortMyDivorce sorts every deadline, offer and issue into one calm dashboard, automatically.
This guide is general information, not legal advice. Laws change and differ by jurisdiction — confirm specifics with a local family lawyer or your court's official website. If you use SortMyDivorce, your letters stay confidential — never shared, never sold.