Court File No. CV-20-00645492-0000
Equibit Group Ltd. v. Attorney General of Canada et al.
Related: Four Critical Failures · Sergei Finally Shows Up · Reply to Sachkov’s Defence
In April 2026, years after default judgment was entered against Sergei Sachkov and later set aside, and months after discoveries in the CSIS action, Sachkov emailed Chris Horlacher directly.
The Email Exchange
He replied on a 2020 thread. He said he had “an offer” that was “not a trick,” proposed a video call while “walking in the forest” for privacy, and declined to speak with lawyers present.
Excerpts from Sachkov:
“I’d like to talk with you about an offer… It’s not a trick or anything from my side.”
“I will be calling from my phone walking on a forest trail to make sure no one can hear us.”
“I’m not comfortable attending a meeting with your lawyers.”
“If you’d like to explore moving the project forward, I’m open to discussions through counsel.”
Horlacher pointed him to counsel and offered to meet at the lawyers’ office.
Kim Ferreira had recently come off the file as Sachkov’s lawyer. On the face of the mail, Sachkov was writing without counsel on the thread.
Why the Channel Matters
Horlacher is represented. The action is live. The ordinary path is counsel to counsel. A party who is self-represented may write the other side. Doing it on an old personal thread, asking for a forest walk so “no one can hear,” and refusing the lawyers’ office is still a side channel. It produces no order, no transcript, and no protection if the call is later described as something it was not.
Horlacher did not take the walk. The mail is preserved.
Place in the Equibit Lawsuit
The Office of the Information Commissioner’s final report on Horlacher’s CSIS access requests recorded ongoing operations. That finding is set out in Five Things the OIC Final Report Established.
Sachkov is a defendant in CV-20-00645492-0000. Liability default and a $1,744,711 damages assessment were entered, then set aside by Justice Merritt. The defects in that endorsement are Four Critical Failures. The Reply to his Defence is dated 27 October 2023. This April 2026 mail sits after discovery, not before default.
It is not a settlement. It is not a Defence. It is a direct approach during a represented proceeding, recorded here because it happened.
