Category Archives: Ethics and Professionalism

Report from Common Law Degree Implementation Committee

Posted on by

The Common Law Degree Implementation Committee has issued its final report, the full text can be found if you click HERE.

The Federation of Law Societies of Canada’s Common Law Degree Implementation Committee (the “Committee”) is pleased to provide this final report to the Council of the Federation of Law Societies of Canada (the “Federation”). In accordance with its mandate, the Committee has developed a proposal to implement the uniform national requirement (the “national requirement”) for entry to law society admission programs in Canadian common law jurisdictions.

Of particular interest to those teaching legal ethics and professionalism, are the recommendations in relation to the mandatory course. Continue reading →

Good Character: Can a person change?

Posted on by

Decision from the Law Society of Upper Canada on Good Character.

Can a person who falls from a place of privilege through his deliberate breach of the public trust be redeemed, or is that person destined to repeat his misdeeds because of an innate character flaw?  Reasonable people may differ in their answer to this question depending on their view of human nature, but our jurisprudence on good character applications starts from the premise than an individual can change for the good, even an individual who has in the past admitted to reprehensible conduct involving breach of the public trust.  If such an individual establishes that, more likely than not, she or he is presently a person of good character, our jurisprudence compels the hearing panel to grant her or his application for a Class L1 licence.

For the full decision, click Good Character – Reasons for Decision – August 19 2011 (2).

Unauthorized practice and access to justice

Posted on by

Great post by Alice Woolley on how regulating the unauthorized practice of law may lead to injustice on ABlawg.ca.  From the introduction:

Unauthorized practice and access to justice

Written by: Alice Woolley

Case considered: Lameman v Alberta, 2011 ABQB 396

The Beaver Lake Cree Nation have commenced an action against the federal and provincial Crowns claiming that their treaty rights have been infringed by the Crown “taking up so much of their traditional territory that [they] have no meaningful right to hunt, trap or fish” (Lameman v Alberta, 2011 ABQB 396, para 12). The Crown brought applications to strike the Nation’s actions, the hearings in respect of which were adjourned on the basis of the Nation’s impecuniosity.

The full post is available at ABlawg.ca and accessed if you click HERE.

Governor General of Canada: Speech to the Canadian Bar Association 2011

Posted on by

His Excellency the Right Honorable David Johnston has posted his inspiring speech for the Canadian Bar Association’s Canadian Legal Conference in Halifax, dated Sunday, August 14, 2011.

From his speech:

How can we use Canada’s sesquicentennial in 2017 to re-evaluate and update our professional responsibility? Can we craft a new definition of the legal professional?

To answer these questions, let me suggest six key relationships that may help us in our search. Each of them contains some friction, and I will dwell mainly on those instances—sometimes as stories—in the hope of being a catalyst for the good. Remember, the oyster requires the irritation of a grain of sand to produce a pearl.

Here are the six: as lawyers, we must attend to our relationships with justice, trust, education, social need, the firm and public service.

For the full text of his speech, go to the website by clicking HERE.

For the The Globe and Mail editorial on “David Johnston’s welcome words to lawyers”, published Wednesday, Aug. 17, 2011 7:30PM EDT, click HERE.

For a response from Ian Holloway on ABlawg.ca titled, “A New Concord Between Bar and Academy? The Governor General’s Speech to the Canadian Bar Association” click HERE

Public Inquiry in the case of Associate Chief Justice Lori Douglas

Posted on by

Canadian Judicial Council announces it will proceed with a public inquiry in the case of Associate Chief Justice Lori Douglas

Ottawa, 6
July 2011 – The Canadian Judicial Council announced today that there will be a public inquiry about Associate Chief Justice Lori Douglas of the Court of Queen’s Bench of Manitoba. After conducting a detailed review of a number of allegations about Associate Chief Justice Douglas, a Review Panel of five judges has concluded that the matter may be serious enough to warrant the judge’s removal from office. The Panel has therefore decided that an inquiry committee should investigate the matter. Continue reading →

Article: Self-Regulation of Legal Profession in Canada

Posted on by

You should care about how lawyers are regulated

Written by Gail J. Cohen Posted Date: June 01, 2011, for the Blog of Canadian Lawyers and Law Times

Posted: 01 Jun 2011 09:38 AM PDT

Original piece posted HERE.

The self-regulatory system for lawyers in Canada needs an overhaul, University of Calgary law professor Alice Woolley argues in a paper http://www.policyschool.ucalgary.ca/files/publicpolicy/A_Woolley_lawregulat_c.pdf  released today.

There has been some (really not enough) debate in the legal profession in Canada about the future of self regulation. There are critics who call for it to be abandoned entirely and have the courts regulate and discipline lawyers as is done in many U.S. states. Continue reading →

Bryden & Hughes: Judicial Disqualification

Posted on by

Philip Bryden and Jula Hughes, “The Tip of the Iceberg: A Survey of the Philosophy and Practice of Canadian Provincial and Territorial Judges Concerning Judicial Disqualification” 48 Alberta Law Review.

Abstract

The “reasonable apprehension of bias” test for judicial disqualification has been a fixture in the common law world for centuries; despite this settled state of the law, judges and commentators have been concerned that the application of the test might be contentious in a significant number of cases. In this article, the authors report on an empirical study surveying Canadian provincial and territorial judges on common scenarios which raise the possibility of recusal. Situated in the applicable case law, the findings demonstrate a wide divergence of opinion on substance and procedure among respondents in their attitudes toward recusal in situations that are analytically marginal, but not rare. The article concludes with some possible explanations for the divergence.

The article is available here:  http://www.albertalawreview.com/index.php/alr/article/view/89

Comment from Adam Dodek:

It is the first empirical assessment of the practice of judicial recusal in Canada that I am aware of.  The results of Bryden & Hughes work raises serious issues regarding the lack of standards for judicial recusal and the lack of any clear process.  I believe that Phil & Jula plan to pursue this issue further which is good news.  I strongly recommend the article to those of you interested in bias, judicial ethics, etc. Adam

Federation of Law Societies of Canada: Conflicts of Interest

Posted on by

The Federation of Law Societies of Canada Advisory Commitee on Conflicts of Interest has posted its supplementary report on Conflicts of Interest.

It is available on the FLSC website by clicking HERE.

The introduction to the report explains:

Introduction

 1. The Advisory Committee on Conflicts of Interest (the “Committee”) was originally mandated to make recommendations to the Council of the Federation on a rule governing conflicts of interest. After studying the relevant law, considering the report of the Canadian Bar Association Task Force on Conflicts of Interest (the “CBA Task Force”), meeting with members of the CBA Task Force, and reviewing the draft rule in the Model Code of Professional Conduct, the Committee issued its final report in June 2010 (the “Final Report”).

 2. In August 2010, while voting on the Final Report by members of Council was underway, the Federation received a response to the Final Report from the Canadian Bar Association (the “CBA Response”). At the request of Council, the Committee was reconvened to consider the CBA Response, to conduct such consultations as the Committee saw fit and to report back to Council.

 3. This is the report of the Committee’s further  onsiderations, consultations and recommendations.