The most widely read magazine for Canadian lawyers
Issue link: https://digital.canadianlawyermag.com/i/50813
"nomadic jurisprudence" is challenging the traditional roles of self-regulated law societies, so too are more pedestrian de- mands such as calls for lower prices and accountability to consumers. In England, former lord chancellor Lord Irvine warned the country's solici- tors in 1999 that they were "drinking in the last chance saloon." The passage of the Legal Services Act of 2007 created potentially radical reforms that included a possible opportunity for supermar- kets and insurance chains to offer legal services. Australia has largely moved to- wards a system in which lawyer oversight is done through a form of co-regulation between the profession and the state. In many U.S. states, oversight is through the courts. New Zealand is in the process of creating a uniform national model of regulation. Nor is the drive for reform limited to the common law world as France's President Nicolas Sarkozy is at- tempting wholesale review of the coun- try's legal profession. Canada may be next in line. A 2007 report by the Competition Bureau con- cluded that the country's self-regulated professions, including lawyers, have un- duly restrictive rules that may be affect- ing productivity and economic growth. For now, Canada's law societies ap- pear to be handling any coming storm in stride. Both Mack and Heins claim that the particular conditions that brought about change in other Commonwealth countries are not present here. In par- ticular, Heins notes that law societies in other jurisdictions ran into confl ict as a result of their confl ating regulatory and representative functions. In Canada, he claims, the discrete mandates of the so- cieties and the Canadian Bar Association prevent this confl ict from arising. As for the challenges presented by in- creased mobility in the profession, Heins points to the recent accord created by the societies to facilitate movement within Canada and adds that the societies are alert to issues surrounding international practice. Mack from Alberta notes that the globalization of the profession may be overstated. "First of all, I would say most lawyers do not work for interna- tional law fi rms. Most lawyers are going about the business of providing services to members of the Canadian public on a day-to-day basis." Mack and Heins may be correct that Canada's legal profession is well poised to continue with its long-time model of self-regulation. But what if they're wrong? Rather than shuddering at the Law society fees comparison Law society fees in each province are typically allocated to three categories: the bulk for general regulation, smaller amounts for libraries, and client compen- sation funds. Figures include GST/HST: B.C.: $1,872.68 Alta.: $2,031.75 Sask.: $1,800.75 Man.: $1,538.25 Ont.: $1,788.15 Que.: $989.52 N.B.: $2,365; $2095 during fi rst fi ve years (inc. CBA) N.S.: $2,507.47 P.E.I.: $1,128.75 Nfl d.: $1,909.70 There are surprising diff erences within the fees. For instance, the client compen- sation fund in B.C. (known as the Special Compensation Fund) is $150, while in Al- berta (the Assurance Levy) is $665. None of the above fi gures include mandatory insurance for private prac- tioners withch rates varies dramatically: in B.C. it is $1,400, in Ontario it is $2,400. There are other unexpected diff erenc- es including the fee for non-practising lawyers: Ontario $894, Nova Scotia $250. OTHER JURISDICTIONS New York: US$350 for two years ($60 to Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection, $50 to Indigent Legal Services Fund). Massachusetts: $300; $220 for fi rst fi ve years. Initial registration fee: $165. Washington: $415; admitted 2005 or 2006 $337; admitted 2007 or 2008 $207; plus $15 client compensation fund. England and Wales: Solicitor "all-in" fees are £995 (Cdn$1,874) a year. – JR prospect of losing self-governance, Ca- nadian lawyers may regard such a turn of events as an opportunity. Self-regulation has until now been a mixed blessing to many — and an expensive one at that. Ultimately, it may be Canadian law- yers themselves who push to dismantle the law societies in favour of an alternate regulatory model such as that offered in the state of New York. A New York- style regime has some obvious appeals, including fees that total only $350 every two years. Those concerned about pro- tecting the public could take comfort in the fact that a portion of these fees is di- rected to a client protection fund akin to the ones in place in each Canadian prov- ince. Moreover, professional discipline is affected through special committees of lawyers under the supervision of the ap- pellate court system. A further potential advantage of disbanding the law societies is the ad- ditional time and money to partici- pate in voluntary bar associations that align more closely with their interests. Already such associations are afford- ing Canadian lawyers an opportunity to take pride not in the regulation of their profession but in the practice of it. "The most important thing I've seen come out of the legal profession in the last fi ve years has been the stand the Ca- nadian Bar Association took last year in support of Pakistan's chief justice and lawyers who were being attacked," says McGill's Kasirer. Any coming shift in the paradigm of legal regulation may also provide a wel- come opportunity for Canadian lawyers to have a fresh look at how they would like their practice to evolve in the future. Such an examination could also explore more fundamental questions such as the degree to which professional autonomy is necessary to ensure the prevalence of the rule of law in Canada. At the very least, Canadian lawyers should remain aware of how dramatic new regulatory models are affecting their profession in other countries, a point underscored by Kasirer. "It is absolutely essential for law societies, law faculties, judges, and practitioners to really look at what people are doing in other parts of the world." www. C ANADIAN Law ye rmag.com JANU AR Y 2009 35