Canadian Lawyer

w w w . C A N A D I A N L a w y e r m a g . c o m F e b r u A r y 2 0 1 5 3 he great debate of 2014 was the future of articling. That issue has by no means been resolved; the Law Society of Upper Canada's experimental alternative to articling has yet to prove itself worthy. As the first group goes through the Law Practice Program, there are definitely differing points of view on its value. But only time will tell how well prepared those LPP students will be to prac- tise but also how those students will be accepted and valued in the profession com- pared to colleagues who went through traditional articles. Stay tuned on that. In 2015, all the noise is about alternative business structures. Last year, the Canadian Bar Association released its Futures report, which boldly proposed: "Lawyers should be allowed to practise in business structures that permit fee- sharing, multidisciplinary practice, and ownership, management, and investment by persons other than lawyers or other regulated legal professionals." In other words, not a traditional law firm. The CBA report also suggests law societies start regulating entities that provide legal services to ensure ethical and professional standards are upheld. The Law Society of Upper Canada released its discussion paper on ABS last September; meetings and townhalls are going on across the province as lawyers debate the issue. The Ontario Trial Lawyers Association, which represents large numbers of personal injury law- yers, has come out strongly against opening up to non-lawyer owners. "There is, as yet, no identified need for law firms to offer non‐legal services that are abundantly and readily avail- able within the litigation support industry," states the OTLA in its submission to the LSUC. "OTLA believes that the profession's core values, and the public interest, can only be protected by ensuring that lawyers maintain control over the delivery of legal services. We do support the regulation of law firms, rather than just individuals, in order to ensure that the actions of employees, for which the firm may be vicariously liable, can be regulated." The OTLA goes on to say there's not been enough evidence of ABS really working or cre- ating more access to justice, so now's not the time for it in Ontario. But supporters of a new legal regime counter that too many of the arguments against ABS come from entrenched, older lawyers making emotional arguments with little evidence to back those up. An associa- tion of law student societies came out in favour of ABS: "[W]e conclude that ABS provides an opportunity for an old profession to renew its service coverage and efficiency, and bolster its statutory obligation to serve the public interest. . . . ABS provides a compelling opportunity for access to justice and a strong business case for legal enterprise." As the law students' response to the LSUC notes, only 12 per cent of Canadians sought assistance for legal problems according to a 2007 Department of Justice study. That's a lot of people who are not getting help and there are many reasons for that: cost, accessibility, lack of knowledge or information, and many more. Every aspect of society is changing, the way people get information is changing, the way people work is changing, so the law and delivery of legal services must change. Regulators in every province are looking at the issue because they realize the status quo is no longer sustainable. For example, in Ontario, paralegals are licensed and can practise in some areas of law. In most provinces, they still need to be supervised by lawyers but should that change? Technology is allowing the delivery of all kinds of services and users young and old are changing. Do lawyers have to own and run a company that creates a legal advice app? While access to justice is a buzzword that may be clouding the issue, giving people different ways to use and access legal services and providing funding and ownership options for inno- vators to create and provide needed services is paramount. Much like in the retail world where there are Wal-Marts and Costcos, multinational as well as local chains, online stores, and independent boutiques; there's space and need in the legal profession to provide a variety of services from a variety of service providers and in a variety of formats. Not all of them need to be 100-per-cent lawyer run and lawyer owned. Director/Group Publisher: Karen Lorimer karen.lorimer@thomsonreuters.com Editor in Chief: Gail J. Cohen gail.cohen@thomsonreuters.com Copy Editor: James Kang Art Director: Bill Hunter Production Co-ordinator: Catherine Giles catherine.giles@thomsonreuters.com Contributors: Jean Sorensen, donalee Moulton, Pascal Elie, Geoff Ellwand, Marg. Bruineman, Jennifer Brown, Jim Middlemiss, Yamri Taddese, Mark Cardwell, Eleanor Brown Canadian Lawyer is published 11 times a year by Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd. All rights reserved. Contents may not be reprinted without written permission. The opinions expressed in articles are not necessarily those of the publisher. Information presented is compiled from sources believed to be accurate, however, the publisher assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions. Canadian Lawyer disclaims any warranty as to the accuracy, completeness or currency of the contents of this publication and disclaims all liability in respect of the results of any action taken or not taken in reliance upon information in this publication. Advertising Sales Representatives Legal Suppliers: Kimberlee Pascoe Tel: (416) 649-8875 E-mail: kimberlee.pascoe@thomsonreuters.com Law Firms: Joseph Galea Tel: (416) 649-9919 E-mail: joseph.galea@thomsonreuters.com Grace So Tel: (416) 609-5838 E-mail: grace.so@thomsonreuters.com Steffanie Munroe Tel: 416-298-5077 E-mail: steffanie.munroe@thomsonreuters.com Canadian Lawyer Magazine Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd. One Corporate Plaza, 2075 Kennedy Rd., Toronto, ON. M1T 3V4 Tel: (416) 298-5141 Fax: (416) 649-7870 E-mail: cl.editor@thomsonreuters.com Web: www.canadianlawyermag.com Linkedin: linkd.in/179bx8t Twitter: @canlawmag Publications Mail Agreement #40766500 ISSN 0703-2129 Copyright © 2015 HST Registration #R121349799 RETURN UNDELIVERABLE CANADIAN ADDRESS TO: CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT One Corporate Plaza 2075 Kennedy RD., Toronto, ON. M1T 3V4 RETOURNER TOUTE CORRESPONDANCE NE POUVANT ÊTRE LIVRÉE AU CANADA AU SERVICE DES PUBLICATIONS One Corporate Plaza, 2075 Kennedy RD., Toronto, ON. M1T 3V4 Circulation/Address Changes/ Subscriptions Keith Fulford: Tel: (416) 649-9585 Fax: (416) 649-7870 E-mail: keith.fulford@thomsonreuters.com Subscription rates: Canada1 year print and digital $99 plus HST, 1 year digital only $99. Outside Canada 1 year print & digital $99 USD, 1 year digital only $99. For all circulation inquiries and address changes send a copy of your mailing label or labels along with your request in writing to Canadian Lawyer, One Corporate Plaza, 2075 Kennedy Rd., Toronto, ON. M1T 3V4 Indexed in the Canadian Periodical Index e D I t o r ' s D e s k By Gail J. Cohen @canlawmag gail.cohen@thomsonreuters.com The great debate of 2015 T

• Cover