Canadian Lawyer

March 2014

The most widely read magazine for Canadian lawyers

Issue link: https://digital.canadianlawyermag.com/i/266137

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 8 of 51

w w w . C A N A D I A N L a w y e r m a g . c o m M a r c h 2 0 1 4 9 centrAl the plaintiff 's objective was to tender a series of expert opinions without having to meet the requirements for admis- sion of this opinion in the form of an expert report. "The differences between the criteria for admission of an expert report and of an opinion in a treating physician narrative are so striking as to make it apparent that what constitutes a treating physician's narrative must be strictly construed to avoid . . . any circumvention of Rule 55.04," Duncan stated. The court also concluded the correct definition of "physician" was a narrow one. The decision, notes Ford, "makes it clear that the term 'physician' is to be interpreted in accordance with its dic- tionary definition and does not include psychologists, physiotherapists, or other non-physician treatment providers." A more expansive definition would detract from the purpose of the rule the court found. "The plaintiff 's argument, if correct, has the potential to signifi- cantly undermine the structure and pur- poses of Rule 55 by overly broadening the number and type of professionals whose reports can avoid the strictures of a formal report, on the basis that they are a 'treating physician,'" Duncan wrote. "I do not accept an outcome that contributes to that extension of the Rule." As a result of this decision, says Ford, "it is questionable what use can be made of psychological or physiotherapy records at trial in a personal injury case." — DM read russell v. Goswell at decisions.courts.ns.ca/site/nsc/ nssc/en/item/65001/index.do 100 years of Montreal Municipal Court A municipal court is, to most peo- ple, a place where you fight your speeding ticket(s). You wouldn't think of it as a forum where judges, sup- ported by a team of specially trained pros- ecutors, defence counsel, and social work- ers, are directing defendants in criminal proceedings toward social programs that offer them the option of therapy instead of jail. Yet, that is what is happening every day at the Municipal Court of Montreal, which celebrates this year the 100th anniversary of its installation in the grand old Gosford Street building in Old Montreal. To be sure, the court does adjudicate on countless cases of contested speed- ing tickets and other infractions, like any other municipal court, but, led by Juge- Président Morton Minc, this court pursues a social approach to justice that has led to the implementation of a series of pro- grams (seven so far) aimed at DUI offenders, homelessness, domestic violence, women offend- ers (mainly shoplifting), conciliation in civil matters, mental health cases, and elder abuse. It is unique in the province; no other court has so extensively developed this approach (the Municipal Court of Quebec City has recently started a mental health program). Minc says the key is to change the culture of judgments from being strictly punitive to con- structive. The goal is to reintegrate the defendant into society and pull the sick person, who is a repeat offender because of his or her ill- ness, out of the system. "In our court, what is important is the per- son, not the crime," says Minc. The goal is to halt the "revolving door" dynamic, whereby an offender comes in and out of the judicial system, endlessly reoffending, and never tackling the personal issue at the heart of the problem. But where does the court's social justice voca- tion come from? Its ancestor was the "Court of the Mayor" created in 1845. It was the first court of justice in Montreal. The mayor and three councillors heard the cases. No legal training was required. Their juris- diction covered tax collection and municipal bylaw violations concerning businesses and every- day life. In 1851, the Recorder's Court replaced it. The recorder was a lawyer with at least five years of experience, appointed to hold office for a duration determined at the "Queen's pleasure," which meant he could be fired on a whim. Its jurisdiction was 'In our court, what is important is the person, not the crime,' says Juge- Président Morton Minc. continued on page 10

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Canadian Lawyer - March 2014