The most widely read magazine for Canadian lawyers
Issue link: https://digital.canadianlawyermag.com/i/50803
innovation Buchan LLP, when it was merged with national firm Fasken Martineau Du- Moulin LLP. At the time, Faskens' man- aging partner David Corbett said John- ston & Buchan "is considered by us to be a jewel among Ottawa firms." Best known for its work in communications and IP law in the areas of telecom- munications regulations, broadcasting, and copyright, Johnston & Buchan also de- veloped a trade law practice encompassing agricultural issues, trade remedies, im- port and export controls, and WTO- and NAFTA-related matters. The 13-lawyer firm is now Faskens' Ottawa office — and lo- cation is important, according to partner Laurence Dunbar, who joined Johnston & Buchan 27 years ago. "Just by being in Ottawa and in contact with bureaucrats, you know how Ottawa works and that's certainly something clients are look- ing for," he explains. "It's a perceived advantage for clients to have people on the ground in Ottawa when dealing with federal regulatory issues." Faskens' Ottawa office does plenty of that, representing such major communi- cations companies as Rogers and Shaw and long distance companies at the CRTC and dealing with Industry Can- ada — most recently on the spectrum- licence auction for new wireless services. Laurence Dunbar Since CRTC decisions can be appealed to the federal cabinet, it's important to know the political movers and shak- ers and who holds sway, says Dunbar. He adds the advantage of being on the ground in the capital also comes into play when new legislation is working its way through Par- liament, or new regulations have been proposed, and cli- ents want to "have their say" and make a representation before a Commons or Senate committee. Understanding and having direct access to the process makes an Ottawa base attractive for clients. However, arranging a meeting between a client and a govern- ment official isn't as easy as it once was, due to federal accountability legislation. "It's considered lobbying," says Dunbar, "which is usually thought to be to try and persuade some politician to vote in a certain way. But, with the Accountabil- ity Act, the definition of lobbying keeps getting broader and more people have to register as lobbyists than in the past." Dealing with bureaucratic red tape is part of the reality of practising law in Canada's capital. But there's also the human-capital element among Ottawa lawyers that brings experience and influ- ence to clients and colleagues alike. For instance, Dunbar, who is co-chairman of Faskens' communications law prac- tice, coauthored a report for the CRTC last year that examined the relevance of each broadcasting policy and regulation. The report made recommendations on how to make the regulatory framework more efficient. Cohen, meanwhile, is an expert on web domain names and inter- national internet governance and policy through his past membership on the board of directors of the Canadian In- ternet Registration Authority and as one of three Canadians to serve on the board of the Internet Corporation for As- signed Names and Numbers (ICANN), the global body that manages the world of .com, .net, .org, and other suffixes. His ICANN work gave him regular contact with the deputy minister of In- dustry Canada and found him visiting 78 countries and logging, by his esti- mate, a million air miles over the last decade. And his internet expertise and IP practice still finds him criss-crossing the globe — with visits to India, Nepal, Australia, Africa, China, and Paris so far on the 63-year-old's itinerary this year. "IP lawyers are a world unto themselves, because the practice is national and in- ternational, and not local," says Cohen. "I might have 10 per cent of my business in Ottawa, but 90 per cent is elsewhere, including out of the country." Dunbar says there's a "divide" between lawyers with practices focused on IP or the federal government, such as his firm with its communications law focus, and www. C ANADIAN mag.com M AY 2008 41