The most widely read magazine for Canadian lawyers
Issue link: https://digital.canadianlawyermag.com/i/1544922
www.canadianlawyermag.com 5 "Without self-governance and self- regulation, there is an institutional opening of the door to government control and interference," he added. "The manner in which lawyers are regulated impacts the manner in which they carry on their duties to clients, courts, and the administration of justice." In the days that followed, Crown counsel Emily Lapper pushed back, arguing that the Legal Professions Act does not inter- fere with "lawyer independence to such an extent that it is unconstitutional." Lapper also argued that neither self-governance nor self-regulation guarantees or is necessary for lawyers' independence. Among the intervenors in October's trial, several took issue with the LSBC and the Trial Lawyers Association of BC's stance that the 2024 law is unconstitutional and threatens the bar's independence. The Indigenous Bar Association argued that the bar's independence is not a consti- tutional principle that can be used to invali- date legislation. The organization also took issue with the plaintiffs' argument that the Legal Professions Act's establishment of an Indigenous council – which would advise the new legal regulator on aligning its practices with BC's reconciliation mandates – creates a model of "co-governance" that interfere with the bar's independence. The Society of Notaries Public of BC, meanwhile, told Skolrood that the constitu- tion does not guarantee the independence of lawyers but, rather, that of legal profes- sionals, meaning the Legal Professions Act does not breach the constitution. In his decision, Skolrood said he agreed with the plaintiffs' stance that the independence of the bar is an "unwritten constitutional prin- ciple." However, he ultimately concluded that the BC legislature has the authority to deter- mine how lawyers should be regulated. "While the legislature has historically chosen a self-governance model, that model is not constitutionally mandated as a requirement for maintaining an independent bar," the justice wrote. He then quoted an article by Ontario Court of Appeal justice Patrick Monahan: "It is the independence of the profession that is constitutionally protected, but not necessarily its 'self governing status.'" "While the legislature has historically chosen a self-governance model, that model is not constitutionally mandated as a requirement for maintaining an independent bar" Ronald Skolrood, BC Supreme Court Chief Justice LEGAL PROFESSIONS ACT TIMELINE March 2022 – BC announces its intention to establish a single regulator for all legal professionals May 2024 – Legal Professions Act receives royal assent July 2024 – The BC Supreme Court denies the LSBC and TLABC's request to issue an injunction to stop the Legal Professions Act from going into effect. Both groups move forward with lawsuits to challenge the law's constitutionality September 2025 – BC Attorney General Niki Sharma says the Legal Professions Act will not go into effect before Skolrood issues a decision, unless the LSBC and Society of Notaries Public of BC are given 30 days' notice October 2025 – The parties argue their cases at a two-week summary trial April 2026 – BC Supreme Court Chief Justice Skolrood dismisses the LSBC and TLBAC's actions