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 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 6 7 A perplexing and controversial bill that would have given the New Brunswick government veto power over the movement of its Supreme Court justices did not achieve third and final reading before the house of assembly rose. Now, it is uncertain whether the bill will be brought back this fall. The speed with which Bill 21, An Act to Amend the Judicature Act, was introduced and the reasons for its intro- duction remain unclear to many in the legal community. The government "never did give a reason what harm they were trying to avoid. [The bill] reared its head in January and away it went," says Ann Whiteway Brown, a Woodstock, N.B. lawyer and president of the Canadian Bar Association - New Brunswick chapter, which protested the proposed legislation. For the legal community, one of the key concerns was judicial independence. Administration of the courts has tra- ditionally been the responsibility of a court's top justice as the person best posi- tioned to deal with caseloads, requests from individual judges, retirements and other issues causing a need for moves, notes John Kleefeld, an associate profes- sor of law at the University of Saskatch- ewan in Saskatoon. "Typically, there is no reason why the minister of justice would be sufficiently acquainted with all these details and no reason for the minister to be involved in them." Opposition members raised concerns that the purpose of the proposed legisla- tion was to keep a specific judge in his or her current location or ensure a new appointment would remain where origi- nally seated. The Department of Justice states that the intent of Bill 21, which would have required approval from the justice min- ister and the judge being moved, was co- operation not confrontation. The goal "was to collaborate with the chief justice of the Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick on matters of the residency of judges. It was proposed with the utmost respect for judicial independence at both an indi- vidual and institutional level," says Elaine Bell, spokeswoman for the Department of Justice and Public Safety in Fredericton. REGIONAL WRAP-UP AT L A N T I C \ AT L A N T I C \ C E N T R A L \ W E S T Future of proposed bill to veto judicial movement uncertain N.S. LAWYERS MUST PREPARE ANNUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN T his year, lawyers in Nova Scotia have one more item on their to-do list: Pre- pare a continuing professional development plan that identifies their educa- tional endeavours over the next 12 months. The new requirement was introduced by the Nova Scotia Barristers' Society to encourage members to enhance their CPD. Rather than having lawyers scramble to complete 12 hours of continuing legal education, as previously required, the society want- ed lawyers to think about what types of programs would best meet their needs and that of their clients. "We wanted to shift from an emphasis on compliance to relevancy," says Jacqueline Mullenger, the NSBS's director of education and credentials in Halifax. According to the law society, the general test question each lawyer must answer is whether the CPD opportunity is primarily for an educational purpose and whether it is relevant to their practice. Then lawyers throughout the province must prepare a written plan that identifies the activities they will undertake to improve and expand their profes- sional skills. A minimum of 12 hours is still expected, although the law society will not undertake a formal tally. Indeed, lawyers will not even have to submit their plans unless specifically requested. In future years, lawyers will need to undertake a two-pronged approach to meeting the law society's CPD requirements. A new development plan must be prepared for the upcoming year and a statement attesting to the completion of the previous year's plan must be included in their annual report to the NSBS. Nova Scotia is not alone in calling on lawyers to prepare an annual development plan. The Law Society of Alberta has had such a rule in place for almost a decade and New- foundland and Labrador recently introduced a similar requirement. Mullenger would like to see the requirement span societies across the country. "If it became a national approach," she says, "it would enhance mobility and be great for clients." — DM IT BASICALLY BLURRED THE LINE BETWEEN EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIARY. WE FELT IT WOULD NOT SURVIVE A CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE. ANN WHITEWAY BROWN Continued on page 8

• Cover