Canadian Lawyer

Ontario JPs to appeal salary ruling T he Association of Justices of the Peace of Ontario will challenge a Superior Court decision that disputes related to JPs salaries must be dealt with through a judicial review. The association asked the Ministry of Government Services to increase the salaries of Ontario's JPs by 3.84 per cent to be in line with Statistics Canada's wage calculating tool. But the government believes JPs are entitled to a 2.7-per-cent salary adjustment for the salary year 2008-09 given Statistics Canada data available in 2008 prior to the updated number. When a three-person remuneration commission was asked to mediate, the majority voted for a compromise adjustment of 3.3 per cent, but the government chose to adopt the recommendation of a 2.7-percent adjustment made by the dissenting member of the commission. "Determining 'fair and reasonable remuneration' requires an objective analysis of what level of remuneration is appropriate to maintain public confidence in the independence of the judiciary," wrote Government Services Minister Harinder Takhar in a Nov. 20 response to the commission. "The majority of the commission failed to conduct such an assessment. Rather, it simply split the difference. . . ." Since the 2.7-per-cent recommendation was the lowest, the government simply chose that one, association counsel James Morton argues. In early January, Superior Court Justice Edward Belobaba dismissed the association's application for a declaration in its favour as he found he wasn't in a position to rule either way. The association must seek judicial review if it finds the government's reasons unacceptable, ruled Belobaba. "These reasons are subject to a 'limited form of judicial review by the superior courts' that should do no more than assess the government's decision on the basis of 'simple rationality.' The appropriate remedy would be judicial review." The association claims the judge should have made a decision by simply interpreting the salaries and benefits of justices of the peace regulation, which was updated shortly after Statistics Canada's improved industrial aggregate index for Ontario came out. "We say this regulation is passed and a regulation is public law binding on everybody and the government and justices of the peace," says Morton. "And the regulation having been passed, we are no longer in the commission process. It's simply a matter of what you want this regulation to mean and the people to determine that are judges." Belobaba also noted that the government isn't obliged to adopt the commission's majority suggestion as long as it provides reasons for not doing so. — Yamri Taddese yamri.taddese@thomsonreuters.com West Mid-size law firms in Alberta fighting to stay in the game T here are less than a half-dozen regional law firms left in Alberta. But the firms will tell you they think there is still a place for them amid the national and international mergers that are changing the province's legal landscape. The mid-size players in Alberta usually employ 50 to 120 lawyers, and do most of their business inside the province, though some have branches in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut. That hometown quality gives the mid-sized firms what Field Law managing partner James Casey calls "a competitive sweet spot." As a leader of one of Alberta's most successful regional firms, Casey hardly qualifies as a neutral observer, but he insists globalization while changing the legal marketplace "creates great opportunities for firms like Field." While he concedes "we can't compete for the big merger and acquisition business in Calgary, we can thrive in other areas and offer a price advantage." Casey points out smaller firms can also provide a personal touch "you may not find in firms with 4,000 lawyers." He calls that being "right-sized." He says globalization will only provide firms with "a competitive advantage if their clients are focused globally." Over at another mid-size firm, McLennan Ross LLP, Edmontonbased managing partner Stephen Livingstone couldn't agree more. "The legal business is different from the accounting business," he says in a not-so-veiled shot at the major firms and their concentration on M&A deals. "It's a lot more personal business." Livingstone wonders what added value the big firms with their higher fees bring to Alberta-focused clients. "It isn't of any particular value www.CANADIAN to a local company that your lawyer has an office in London." Livingstone acknowledges "we continue to be in a time of rapid change, but I can't imagine that we won't continue to see regional firms." He points out the big firms, given the enormously wide sweep of their business, are vulnerable to having potential conflicts and will increasingly rely on the more narrowly-focused regional firms to help them out. Livingstone insists his firm is "different," with lawyers concentrating significantly on litigation and labour law and having a solid foundation in the oil sands. "We're the largest management labour firm by a long shot." But while Livingstone makes a persuasive case for the continuation of regional legal business, he says McLennan Ross is very much alive to the need to adapt and innovate in an enterprise undergoing fundamental adjustments. The firm refreshes its strategic plan every five years. "We underwent an intensive planning process two years ago, and are now in mid-cycle. But that process reinforced our vision of being a proud, independent regional firm." Like a lot of the mid-sized legal industry in Alberta, Livingstone confirms McLennan Ross has been approached by national firms exploring the possibilities of a merger. He says the firm "saw very little upside" in those proposals and has no intention of merging at this time. When it comes to being wooed by potential merger partners, Casey says "we've been approached on numerous occasions by firms with national aspirations. We're always interested in talking. You never say never." — Geoff Ellwand writerlaw@gmail.com L a w ye r m a g . c o m F e b r uary 2013 9

• Cover