The most widely read magazine for Canadian lawyers
Issue link: https://digital.canadianlawyermag.com/i/50838
REGIONAL WRAP-UP ATLANTIC for Nl — AT loNg lAsT has become the last province in Canada to enact this legislation. The Public Trustee Act, 2009 establishes an independent gov- ernment agency to manage estates, trusts, and guardianships. "The administration of estates in this province has historically been assigned to the Supreme Court [of Newfoundland and Labrador]. The reg- istrar has traditionally had responsibil- ity for this," Justice Minister Felix Collins told Canadian Lawyer. "The role of the public trustee is a more independent office. It also allowed us to revamp the structure of the Supreme Court." For lawyers, the new legislation, which N is now in place, will not mean dramatic changes, says Douglas Wright of Cox & Palmer in St. John's. "It's more landscap- letters to the editor Signing on early 50 years after it first passed a public trustee act, Newfoundland and Labrador ing than bringing substantive changes. It will be helpful to those whose property is held by the public trustee. It will be more transparent and ultimately accountable to the minister of justice." The new act will also facilitate access to justice, says Collins. "This is the sole role of the public trust- ee. It's more accessible." The transition from system to govern- court ment agency has been relatively seamless. It's not only responsibility that has shifted; court staff formerly handling these issues has moved to the new Office of the Public Trustee, and John Baird has been appointed acting Public Trustee, a position similar to one he held under the Supreme Court structure. The former configuration was puz- zling to many. "Historically people won- dered why this was under the auspices of the court," notes Wright. "In some cases, the court was appointing its own officials as trustee." The new act replaces an original act passed in 1962 — but never proclaimed. "One theory is government may that the have Justice Minister Felix Collins been reluctant to assume responsibility for this," says Wright. "Another is that there was no government in the province that had the financial resources to estab- lish a separate division." — DONALEE MOULTON donalee@quantumcommunications.ca Comments from canadianlawyermag.com LEGAL REPORT/ADR Nice overview. However, though Canada was the first country to implement the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbi- tration, as the article says, it was far from the first to implement the New York Convention. The convention had been around for nearly 30 years when Canada signed on in 1986. Part of the delay was the relative lack of interest in (international) arbitration before the '80s, and part [of] the difficulty of getting implementation in all the provinces and ter- ritories, since the convention did not permit (as newer ones do) piecemeal implementation. To some extent the [International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes] Convention faces the latter challenge today. — Online comment from JOHN G Getting the word out O Canada is an international centre for arbitration but stands to lose business if it doesn't better promote its well-earned reputation. BY PAUL BRENT ver the years, Canada has earned its reputation as a destination for interna- tional arbitration. Canada was the first country to adopt and implement the United Nations' UNCITRAL Model Law implementation statutes 25 years ago as well as the first to sign on to the New York Convention, an international treaty covering foreign arbitration awards. The country has also prospered as a place to carry out com- mercial arbitration due to its proximity to the United States, its bilingual and multicultural status, reputation for fair- ness and neutrality, common and civil law systems, and a court system supportive of arbitration. Arbitration practitioners in Canada can take satisfaction in the fact their field of practice seems to be growing and healthy. The number of cases heard in Canada continues to grow each year, arbitration is increasingly being chosen over court actions among parties, and courts have made a number of judg- ments in support of arbitration. The main centres for international arbitration in Canada are Montreal, Toronto, Calgary, and Vancouver. Arbitration practitioners also can't help but regularly read about Canada as about one-third of the cases worldwide that interpret UNCITRAL model law or deal with it come out of this country — a testa- ment to all the jurisdictions that deal with arbitration. According to the UNCITRAL Secretariat, which maintains a database of case law on UNCITRAL texts, of the 316 decisions reported, 112 emanate from Canadian courts. The Supreme Court of Canada has also made a series of judgments favouring arbi- tration including Yugraneft Corp. v. Rexx Management Corp.; Union des consomma- teurs c. Dell Computer Corp.; Desputeaux c. Éditions Chouette (1987) inc.; and Seidel v. TELUS Communications Inc. Just how well respected Canada is as a location for international arbitration was illustrated in a recent Global Dispute Resolution report conducted by Taylor Wessing. The report ranked Canada third behind Switzerland and Australia in a list of 21 countries as a place for arbitration. Canada, along with the U.K., Australia and Singapore, "were found to be predict- able and reliable jurisdictions in which to determine disputes . . . " the study concluded after its authors surveyed 300 international respondents in mid-2009. Canadian universities are also doing their part to maintain Canada's place on the world arbitration stage. This year, a team of law students from the University of Ottawa won the 18th annual Willem C. www.CANADIAN Lawyermag.com SEPTEMBER 2011 39 CL_Sep_11.indd 39 8/16/11 11:05:01 AM Let's be more open I agree that privacy concerns are getting out of hand. One of the more trou- bling tendencies I've noted recently is for parties to seek orders to suppress the publication of decisions in family law proceedings citing concerns for the privacy of the children. I think one of the purposes of a public court system is to try to check the poor behaviour of the parties (and others by example) by making their behaviour public. If that public exposure has consequences for their children in school, etc., so be it. You can't hide children from the fact that their parents are human beings and sometimes engage in ill-considered behaviour. However, you can embarrass those parents and hold them res- ponsible for the consequences, including the effects on their children. — Online comment from MICHELE BALLAGH One of the few remaining avenues for opening institutions' malfeasance to public scrutiny are civil court proceedings. But even here the public sector institutions and governments settle the cases before trial and insist on con- fidentiality clauses, the Caledonia residents class action settlement being a recent example. This results not only in lack of transparency, but also in a complete failure of accountability. Public institutions should not be allowed [to] cover up their errors and malfeasance by paying taxpayers' money as hush money. We need legislation to outlaw "confidentiality" clauses in court settlements with public sector bodies. — Online comment from LUBOMIR POLIACIK right to edit for space, taste, and libel considerations. Please send letters to welcomes letters to the editor but reserves the and include your full contact information. Or visit us online at and leave your comments. Send your letters to: gail.cohen@thomsonreuters.com www.CANADIAN Lawyermag.com OCTO BER 2011 7 Publi c Trus T ee A c T R ember 2011 e: Gettin Sept g the w or d out C anadian L a wy er g ail.c ohen@thomsonr eut ers.c c om anadianla wy erma g.c om R e: Sept oo much secr Tember 2011 ecy DUSHAN MILIC