Canadian Lawyer

32 F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 7 w w w . C A N A D I A N L a w y e r m a g . c o m Hinkson on his administrative law find- ings about the process, but it ruled in favour of Trinity Western on Charter grounds. "This case demonstrates that a well-intentioned majority acting in the name of tolerance and liberalism, can, if unchecked, impose its views on the minority in a manner that is in itself intolerant and illiberal," wrote a five- judge panel of the court, headed by its chief justice, Robert Bauman. While a referendum is permitted under its rules and occurred in B.C. on two other occasions, it was not the proper way to address Trinity Western's application, says Cowper. "I am not suggesting that individual members did not try to do their best," he explains, but he adds that benchers have a statu- tory obligation "to get it right" when carrying out the responsibilities of the Law Society. "A reference to the general membership runs the risk that it is a purely political decision," says Cowper. Benchers in Ontario debated the Trinity Western issue on two separate days before voting 28-21 against accred- itation. Several of them made lengthy oral submissions to try to win over the votes of colleagues. "It was extremely heated and emo- tional at times," recalls Eugene Meehan, a partner at Supreme Advocacy LLP in Ottawa. Meehan represented Trin- ity Western in its accreditation request before the Law Society in Ontario. He was also among the proponents of the university who wrote letters of support to the Federation of Law Societies. While Trinity Western was permit- ted to address those at the meeting and provide written submissions, the law society also received a legal opinion that the public comments of the benchers on the issue were sufficient to represent the "reasons" for the decision. This pro- cess was found to be reasonable by the reviewing courts, but Meehan remains troubled by some aspects of what hap- pened at the law society. "When people are allowed to say things that are irrel- evant and toxic, then the decision is suspect," says Meehan. The day after the vote in Ontario, the barristers' society in Nova Scotia narrowly passed a resolution to approve Trinity Western on the condition that it amend the covenant or not require students to sign it. Three months later, the barristers' society amended its regulations to give it the power to refuse approval to a law school that "unlawfully discriminates" in its admissions policy. The province's Court of Appeal found that this amendment was beyond the powers of the regulator, although it suggested that wording similar to that which is in place in Ontario might be acceptable. The barristers' society did not seek leave to appeal that decision. As well, it changed its regulations back to the origi- nal version, pending what happens at the Supreme Court of Canada. The change in the regulation that sug- gested the barristers' society could deter- mine whether discrimination was unlaw- ful was problematic, says Halifax lawyer Amy Sakalauskas. However, she says it deserves credit for trying to be transpar- ent about its concerns with the covenant. "What Nova Scotia was trying to do was Canada's leading in-house counsel discuss how they are helping their organizations innovate for the future BROUGHT TO YOU BY COMING TO www.canadianlawyermag.com/canadianlawyer-tv/InHouse Maurizio Romano Janssen Inc. Matthew Snell IBM Katie Jamieson Herschel Supply Co. Tanya Rothe D-Wave Untitled-1 1 2017-01-24 9:26 AM

• Cover