Author: writer

Posted on

Help Me Help You: Legal Mentorship in BC

As a law student, and particularly as an articling student, mentoring is an important part of our development. Mentors are there to help us through times of uncertainty, to teach us, and to pass on along their experiences. But what happens with mentorship once you are finished articling?

The prevailing idea is that the firm you work for as an articling student or as a new lawyer will informally mentor you; however, while that firm may teach you how to do the day-to-day work in a chosen area of law, there is no guarantee as to how much mentorship you will receive. With the billable hour still king, there may be a lack of time or manpower to mentor a new lawyer as they adapt to a challenging new career, particularly in areas such as the business side of how a law firm runs, skills to deal with clients, personal wellness, and work-life balance issues. Even experienced lawyers may need mentorship as they strike out on their own, or if they begin practicing in new areas of law. When you work alone, or you do not have a sufficient professional network to support you, where do you turn to for mentorship?

Law Society of BC Mentorship

In BC, the Law Society of offers continuing professional development (CPD) credits in hopes of fostering mentorship relationships within the profession. On their website, the Law Society explains their mentoring program as “lawyers with experience or expertise in a practice area or practice skill providing guidance or advice in support of the professional goals of another lawyer, or an articling student in another firm, who requests assistance.”

The Law Society itself must approve in advance a mentorship plan, which includes such things as the mentee’s specific development and learning goals, must encompass broad practice issues and skills, and that the parties plan to meet a minimum of six hours over the course of year with documentation of the time spent when the hours are complete. Mentoring plans that do not qualify for CPD credit include “client or business development, marketing or profit maximization, wellness or work life balance issues, or seeking advice on specific client files.”

But is it Enough?

These guidelines raise some concerns. To begin with, since the Law Society’s mentorship program is strictly volunteer, it is unlikely to fulfill the mentorship needs of all of its members. It is not only new lawyers that need mentorship; solo practitioners, experienced lawyers practicing in new areas of law, or lawyers starting their own firms may desire mentorship. While the CPD credits are a good attempt at incentivizing lawyers to become mentors, there may still be a shortage of mentors compared to the need.

Being on a volunteer basis also runs the risk of a lack of diversity among mentors offered by the Law Society. While the Law Society and CBA have somewhat addressed this in mentorship programs through the Women Lawyers Forum (WLF) and Aboriginal Lawyers Mentorship Program, a lack of mentors would be unlikely to match the diversity of the Law Society membership requesting mentorship. As discussed in class, the legal profession is having a problem retaining women and culturally diverse groups in its ranks, and having access to mentorship from lawyers in similar self-identified groups may be one solution to help keep them in the profession.

Finally, the Law Society mentorship plan has limitations on what areas of mentorship qualify for CPD credits. While newer lawyers may need assistance with broad practice issues and skills, I feel the law society is not fulfilling the mentorship needs of its membership by not allowing for CPD credit mentorship of non-legal areas such as business or client development, marketing, and wellness or work life balance issues. If, for example, you are a solo practitioner in a rural part of BC and need mentorship on how to run and develop your practice, where do you turn? While online courses may be offered by the Law Society in these areas, an experienced solo practitioner would be an invaluable mentor to these lawyers, and could only be a phone call away. If the Law Society is going to offer CPD credit mentorship to its members, shouldn’t it be encouraging mentorship in all areas of being a lawyer, not just practice issues and skills?

While the Law Society has endeavoured to ensure that lawyers in BC have some access to mentorship in their area of practice, it is currently still on the lawyers themselves to develop their own mentoring network that will fulfill all of their practice needs and questions. Networking has always been emphasized in law school as a way to find a job, but the true value of networking now may be the mentorship it provides later.

Posted on

Forgive us, Canada! Student Debt & Legal Aid

As freshly graduated students and young lawyers, working in the public sector or in legal aid is a difficult path to decide upon, for those who wish to pursue it.  As graduates of Canadian Law schools with usually around anywhere from $50,000 to $100,000+ in debt, it is one of the first things on all of our minds when we are about to graduate.  I have personally always wanted to work in Legal Aid, and ideally right out of law school.  However, over these three years, as I have watched my debt increase significantly, this has become a non-option if I want to pay my loans off in a reasonable time.

Unlike Canada, the American Bar Association has a sturdy system of loan repayment assistance programs (“LRAPs”), which provide loan repayment or lower loan payments to graduates entering specific types of employment, usually law-related public interest jobs. At the federal level, attorneys who work for a non-profit organization, the government, or a few other qualified employers may be eligible for forgiveness of their federal direct loans after making 120 payments and meeting other qualifications.

At the state level, 26 Loan Repayment Assistance Programs (LRAPs) in 24 states provide loans or grants to civil legal aid attorneys and in some cases, other public interest attorneys, to help them pay their educational debt. Many of these programs are set up to comply with the tax code provision that makes the assistance non-taxable income, which helps even more.  There is also the option of Employer Loan Repayment Assistance – many civil legal aid organizations and some other public interest employers provide loan repayment assistance to their attorneys.

In California for example, legal aid firms are well-equipped.  The largest, Bay Area Legal Aid, has eight offices around the Bay Area with many attorneys at each location.  The lawyers are dedicated and passionate, and many of them are from prestigious law schools such as Berkeley, Columbia, Harvard, etc.  Additionally, a lot of them have been working in legal aid since they graduated law school, as this is a tangible option when they are guaranteed loan forgiveness.

These programs make working in the public sector so much more accessible, and even desirable. From an access to justice perspective, it greatly benefits the public to have access to plenty of lawyers who are well-trained and from the top schools in the country to represent them.

The opposite is true in Canada. In Alberta, for example, legal aid is funded by the provincial and federal governments, and the Alberta Law Foundation – yet funding is a constant issue.  There have been many layoffs in legal aid and the salaries are not nearly as high as one could find in a firm, or in-house position, so students are choosing the latter.

On a more positive note, there has been some movement toward loan forgiveness for lawyers. The Canadian Bar Association’s B.C. branch (CBABC) has been lobbying the provincial government to add lawyers to StudentAid BC’s loan forgiveness program. There is a high need for lawyers in rural communities and the CBABC has been attempting to address the issue through their program Rural Education and Access to Lawyers which is funded by the law society and the law foundation in the province.

Additionally, some Canadian law schools are experimenting with income contingent loan programs. At York University’s Osgoode Hall, there are a few students included in a program that provides funds to cover tuition costs, requiring repayment depending on the student’s financial status before and after law school.  Osgoode has implemented a pilot project that is an income contingent loan program aimed at granting eligible students loans to cover tuition, which are to be repaid according to their post-law school income levels.

All of this is definitely a start, and I am very optimistic that one day we can get to a place where legal aid is more accessible for all – including the lawyers that want to pursue a career in it.

Posted on

In Demand: A Business Savvy Lawyer

Throughout my schooling and work experiences thus far I have always contemplated the importance of being a self-starter. Being motivated and having the ability to motivate others, working towards pre-set goals, and focusing on nurturing relationships are all components of this. The overarching theme, however, is having that ‘entrepreneurial spirit.’

But what does entrepreneurial spirit really mean? More importantly, how is that relevant for us as future lawyers?

I believe it is very important and highly relevant! The practice of law is such that you are your own brand. Therefore, you will be perceived in the manner that you portray yourself as an individual. This is true, regardless of the firm you work for. Whether you come from one of the national firms or a small to mid-sized firm, you the lawyer are the service provider. Therefore, building your own brand is very important. The key to this is being cognizant of this fact before you enter the practice.

I believe your personal brand and having a sense of entrepreneurial spirit are two sides of the same coin. I have read many books on personal development and the common thread between them is the importance of building daily practices for yourself to ensure long-term success. Building habits that support entrepreneurialism and integrating these behaviours into daily life should be the first steps to building our practice.

Your Personal Brand

Now what does that really mean? As Jeff Bezos, the CEO of Amazon famously said: “Your brand is what people say about you when you are not in the room.”

As I mentioned earlier, it really comes down to your personal interactions with a client that make all the difference not necessarily which firm you work for. Whether or not a client wants to do business with you is based on the experience they have had with you and the service you have provided. So it is important to focus on your own core values and build disciplines to create your own unique personal brand.

I suggest taking some time for yourself and really thinking about what it is that you really want from your practice, where do you see yourself in a few years, and most importantly how do you want to be known? You don’t need to have any business knowledge or background to know that building and nurturing client relationships is key to any prospering business’ success. But what will set you apart?

In a non-law interview I had a few years ago, one of the interviewers asked me to describe my ‘personal brand’ in 3 words. This was an interesting question and really got me thinking – so perhaps this is a way for you to start thinking about this idea as well. These are some questions you can ask yourself to help you in determining what defines you:

When others see something as a problem, are you that person who sees the opportunity? Are you that person who is willing to step out of their comfort zone to really gain the most out of an experience? Are you focused on pushing paper or really digging deep to provide the best value to your clients?

To the point about providing the best value, one of my favourite authors, Robin Sharma says it well, “the market place rewards value delivery.” I believe this is a very key insight. Once we begin practicing law, if we concentrate on providing the most value to our clients, we can really set ourselves apart! Along with trying to provide the best value, Robin suggests focusing on your “craft” and gaining mentors along the way to help pave your path for a successful legal career.

Which leads me to my next point: surround yourself with people who understand your vision, who can help you reach your goals and help you become an expert in your area. A mentor can really assist in shaping your future. They can help you determine what your strengths are (personal brand) and keep you motivated to achieve the highest levels of success.

Entrepreneurial Spirit

This phrase may be overused, but it is relevant to the field of law. Whether you are working at a big law firm, which may not require you to seek out your own clientele (yet) or whether you are at a smaller firm, eventually you will be required to establish your own client base or contribute to the existing client relationships.

In my opinion this is a great opportunity and also very exciting. You will be able to focus on your set of clients and provide them tailored advice. The way to get a head start is by developing values that push you to really think like an entrepreneur.

There are a few reasons to develop an entrepreneur’s mindset. First, it will separate you from the rest of your cohort, who may not have yet thought about the future and the realities of the legal field. Second, you may eventually decide to drop out of the mid-to-large sized firm and create your own legal business. In which case, it is absolutely essential to have that inner confidence to pursue entrepreneurial opportunities in a ‘business-oriented’ manner.

Here are some ways to go about this: Read a book on a successful self-made entrepreneur, listen to unique leadership speakers (Robin Sharma is great), or just take the time to self-reflect. This is not an overnight realization, nor is it only for those that are already ‘business savvy’ – this is a life-long pursuit and you can begin working on it today!

As we approach our careers, these skills will help us build a strong foundation and will be useful in the challenging but hopefully rewarding legal practice.

Posted on

Cultural Competency: A Vital Skill for a 21st Century Lawyer

childrenworld800

Oh, Canada! I believe that our great nation is one celebrated for its racial, ethnic, cultural diversity in our people, industries, and way of life. In our increasingly multicultural society, it comes as no surprise that lawyer-client relationships are also as culturally diverse. With that in mind, I believe that a successful 21st century lawyer should be well-equipped for the realities of practice – and that is to be culturally competent when interacting with diverse clients, fellow practitioners, and other members of our legal profession from all walks of life.

* * *

Just what exactly is cultural competency? 

Cultural competency has been defined as a “set of congruent behaviours, attitudes and policies that come together in a system, agency, or profession that enables that system, agency or profession to work effectively in cross-cultural situations”. Put simply, a culturally competent lawyer is not only aware of their clients’ cultural backgrounds, but goes beyond to recognize that cultural undertones may inform behaviours, motivations, and their relationship with the client. In doing so, a culturally competent lawyer can effectively assist with advocacy and communication across cultural experiences.

Why is there a need for culturally competent lawyers?

Cross-cultural clients often face challenges and barriers when dealing with legal issues that stem from their unique cultural experiences. This list is not exhaustive nor reflective of every interaction, but I believe that these are common issues that cross-cultural clients may face:

  • Communication – The obvious is a language barrier between a lawyer and cross-cultural client. However, communication can include client’s body language, non-verbal cues, and mannerisms that may vary from culture to culture. When the lawyer is not cognizant of these cues, they are prone to missing important indicators of communication from the cultural client.
  • Cultural values – Individuals of different ethno-racial groups may think, behave, and express themselves differently from other clients. Sometimes, these practices greatly contrast common practices of mainstream culture (i.e. eye contact in North American culture regarded as confidence vs. direct eye contact can be viewed as disrespect in East Asian cultures)
  • Colour-blindness – Colour-blindness is a huge issue. Instead of working to recognize and accommodate cultural differences to provide appropriate legal services, colour-blindness ignores that there are even differences in the first place. This ideology disregards that clients of cultural groups foster diverse values, behaviours, and communication needs, all of which require special attention.
  • Stereotypes – There is also a danger of negative stereotypes being projected onto cross-cultural clients. Lawyers have to be cognizant of these stereotypes, so that they do not become normalized, repeated practices against clients of a particular cultural group.

What are some ways to utilize cultural competency in practice?

I do not think becoming a culturally competent lawyer is particularly difficult. It definitely takes practice and requires adopting a set of lawyering skills tailored to this special niche of clients, but it is like learning any other skill.

Courts, legal aid clinics, and many law firms have already adopted translators, interpreters and other language aid tools for their cross-cultural clients, which is a great start. In order for lawyers to provide competent services to clients of other cultures, basic knowledge of their cultural practices or values should be given preliminary research much just like any other legal issue that would be given the same attention. Another helpful tip is to adopt an open, culturally appropriate attitude when interacting with cross-cultural clients. I think the biggest challenge for lawyers is to seeing past the dichotomy between the dominant Western culture and non-Western cultural practices. If lawyers stop trying to make sense of cultural practices using dominant Western ideals as a benchmark, I think we can foster an attitude that is open towards clients of other cultures, and can even spot similarities that were not as obvious before. Lastly, I believe that there should be more attention to cross-cultural education in law schools, or teaching cultural competency in law school clinics and continuing legal education. This change in education could help implement core skills in law students on how to interact with cross-cultural clients, before they enter the profession.

 

Lawyers are advocates for clients from all walks of life including clients of other cultures. So isn’t it time we recognized cultural competency as a necessary skill to being a successful lawyer in the 21st century?

Posted on

Terra Firma: My Experience at a New Type of Legal Startup

WHAT IS TERRA FIRMA?

Like many law students running through the fall interview process of second year, I had little idea of what I wanted to do in the summer before my third and final year of law school. I was very fortunate that a family friend of mine had heard of my predicament and reached out with an offer to come work at his firm.

I knew that the firm’s primary focus was residential real estate law. I also knew that this firm, Spagnuolo and Company, is one of the largest residential real estate and conveyancing firms in terms of pure volume in British Columbia. However, what I did not know was that I wouldn’t really be working for the firm; not directly, anyway. This job offer was a summer position at a new company that the principal of the firm was starting to create a new system to essentially automate a portion of his work.

This company was called Terra Firma, and it was designed to systematize and expedite a chunk of the firm’s business. More specifically, it was a new way of providing title reviews for property. Essentially, during the process of preparing documents for the transfer of residential property, clients will get in touch with a firm like Spagnuolo and Company to have a lawyer review the real estate title of the property in question, and explain to the client several pieces of information contained on the title.

One of these pieces of information is related to non-financial charges (as opposed to financial charges, like mortgages): that is, many properties contain easements, covenants, statutory rights of way, etc. These charges could ultimately have an effect on your ability to use the property as you see fit, so having a lawyer look over these charges is a good idea. The majority of time these charges don’t have any real noticeable effect. Usually they merely grant a right to, for example, allow Shaw to enter the property to check on cable lines or grant a right to the neighbouring property for their roof to hang over a portion of your property.

Traditionally, in reviewing the title, the lawyer would often first have to look up the real estate title, order copies of the actual charges listed on title, and then spend time reviewing those documents and explaining it to the client. All these steps of the process cost money, and this cost was ultimately passed over to the client. Terra Firma, however, was a fix for this process.

Essentially, Terra Firma is a “Netflix-style” subscription service, whereby clients (usually realtors) would pay a monthly fee and have access to a library of not only the PDF’s of these non-financial charges, but an accompanying one-page title review on the Spagnuolo and Company letterhead. The business idea would theoretically save realtors a sizeable portion of money they would otherwise spend in ordering individual charges and having a lawyer review them every single time.

Where I came into the picture was the actual reviewing of the titles. Under the supervision of a lawyer, myself and another TRU law student would receive PDF versions of these non-financial charges that were ordered by several other employees, read them, and write a short one-page review. Then we would package the non-financial charge and the review in one document and add it to a library, which would eventually become available to paying clients.

By the time I left to begin my third year, Terra Firma had not yet completed this library, so clients could not yet sign onto the website and receive their charge and review instantaneously. However, the company was well on its way and already had a sizeable client base. Clients currently pay a monthly fee, but at this point place and order and receive the finished product within 3 days.

THE FUTURE OF LAWYERING

 

So what does this have to do with the future of lawyering? Well, from my experience, there were several parts of this experience that highlighted some changes ahead in the legal profession, including:

  1. Automation and Systems: Residential real estate has been discussed by several lawyers I’ve met as a portion of the legal practice most susceptible to automation. Terra Firma is potentially one of those systems, as it in a sense automates a large portion of the business the firm was previously doing. Title review is not an overly complicated job, which meant that law students and other employees were able to review the titles and send them to a lawyer for a quick check over for quality control. The beauty was that once the title review was finished, it was added to a library and could be accessed any number of times it was on title, which in the case of strata properties or apartment buildings, was actually quite often.
  1. Use of Outsourcing: One of the most interesting things I found about Terra Firma was the use of a legal company in India to review documents. We would package 100 or so individual charges, and send them to India for review. The law students would then review the documents sent from India, make changes where they were needed, and send them off to a lawyer for a final check before being added to the database. This meant that, due to the time difference between Canada and India, that the database (and currently, individual orders) was constantly being updated. The use of outsourcing for mundane and repetitive tasks has already been mentioned in books such as “The 4-Hour Work Week”, and it was interesting to see its effectiveness in the legal context.
  1. Client-Centric Business Focus: The days of charging clients exorbitant amounts of money for things they didn’t really understand is over, especially for the layman trying to buy a house. Terra Firma’s monthly fee structure is one way of attracting clients who would rather not pay for each charge and then have a lawyer read it and tell them what it says. But Terra Firma was client-focused in other ways as well. The one page reviews were almost completely devoid of any legal jargon. They were ultra-simplistic, and took into account that a client doesn’t really care what a 90 page document from 1942 says, all they care about is whether there is anything in it that affects them in their day-to-day life. Even if they would like to see more information about the charge, part of the product they receive contains a PDF version of the charge itself. Ultimately, the mandate at Terra Firma was to provide a very accessible product for the client at a price that seemed reasonable.
  1. Remote Offices: While we did have a small office space to work out of, once we had the system figured out every part of Terra Firma was accessible from outside the office. We kept track of individual orders on a Google Doc style spreadsheet we all had access to, we had portals into the office servers set up on our personal laptops, and title or charge ordering services all have online access as well. Even Dye and Durham, a legal courier service for older documents that had not been scanned and needed physical copies ordered, had an online ordering service. There were days where I was sick, or couldn’t make it in due to prior commitments, but I could always make up the orders needed by picking up my laptop and working on them from home.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR THE LEGAL PROFESSION?

 

The reception from other lawyers when I told them this was mixed. On the one hand, many thought it was a very interesting project with a lot of potential. Some, on the other hand, weren’t buying it and thought it wasn’t the best idea. In fact, one lawyer got visibly upset when he discussed the loss of work it would mean for other lawyers.

In any event, it was an incredibly interesting experience and it was refreshing to see some innovation in a profession that is famed for its “last across the line” reputation. While it may lead to less work for some lawyers, the reality is that clients logically would be more attracted to receiving the same product with a more accessible interface and for a lower price.

At the very least, it will be interesting to see where such systems will take us in other areas of law.

Posted on

Gender Bias: Everyone’s Issue

Introduction

Let me be the first to say, that in my lifetime I have heard about gender inequality on countless occasions. Throughout my education, it was drilled into my mind, and the minds of others like me, that being a female will prove to be challenging when attempting to climb the corporate ladder in my chosen profession.

When I first stepped into law school 2 years ago, I was (and still am) an ambitious and driven law student who always dreamt of becoming a big shot partner at a reputable law firm. I quickly came to realize that, in the legal profession these traits might not be enough for me to achieve my professional development goals.

Is it for my lack of qualification or my lack of drive? I want to assume (and I hope this to be true) that it is not. Unfortunately, this is the reality that many young and seasoned, very qualified, female lawyers face throughout the course of their careers. Over the years society has decided that women are not sound investments. Mark A. Cohen recently touched on this topic in his article, “BigLaw’s Gender Diversity Problem is The Traditional Model Itself.” He describes how women have historically been “punished” for seeking work-life balance, especially when it comes to child rearing and maternity leaves. So what I am hearing is that being genetically predisposed to bare children is the reason fewer women (who work very hard, if not harder than men in some instances) are not fit to climb the corporate ladder and sit in the top ranks of the legal profession. This seems very absurd and unfair, considering we are living in the 21st century. However, this is the reality.

Despite recent initiatives to neutralize the legal profession and tackle the gender bias that exists, the presence of women in the legal profession is seemingly low, especially in senior and partnership positions. The presence of the white male continues to dominate in many law firms. We know that women have been attending law school in equal numbers to our male counterparts, but this fails to be reflected in practice. I would like to argue that the reason for this is that even with the increased initiatives to recruit more qualified female lawyers, there is little done to keep them in the profession and allow them to grow in an environment that meets their needs.

What I mean by this is that hiring an equal number of female and male associates is not enough to change the gender bias. Internal practices and personal views that have been embedded in our society, particularly the “superior” male, need to be altered. Gender roles in the 21st century have changed significantly, and we now see more males assuming domestic roles and contributing to historically female “jobs”. Paternity leave is becoming much more common than it once was. To me, this equalization in the domestic sphere should naturally coincide in the employment sector. If a partner will support a male associate and afford paternity leave to him then why condone a female who may or may not even take maternity leave, simply because she is predisposed to and has a right to, if she so chooses.

The obstacle remains in changing firm culture and views in order to adequately address the gender bias issues. This is obviously no easy task. I suggest we start at the bottom and work our way up, and hope for a slow, seamless change because history tells us that dramatic change in the legal profession is unlikely. Bringing up these issues and engaging in active discussions in classroom settings throughout law school, and in law firms will, slowly but surely, impact and diminish dated attitudes about women in the legal profession. It has been shown that simply hiring more women and meeting the “quota” will not be enough to change the current gender disparities. We need to demand more from the profession and that means accepting and acknowledging women as equal to men despite our genetic differences.  The 21st century needs to foster change, and we need to be the ones to implement it, because we have gone too long working in a profession full of ancient attitudes.

Posted on

IS SMALLER SAFER? – PART 1

This is part one of a two part blog aimed at assessing the future of the small law firm. Part one will outline questions and comments that I hope to answer in part two after conducting future research and listening to the opinions that people may have in the comments section of this post.

Although it has been an eye-opening experience to see the future of the profession and the factors at play that will affect it going forward, it seems so far the focus has been more on large, corporate structured firms. However, for myself, this left me pondering how this all could relate to a smaller firm in a smaller city (for example, rural cities in British Columbia). I am curious to know whether these smaller firms in smaller cities will be more or less affected by the innovations anticipated in the coming years. Some say that only the largest, most-established firms will be the firms that survive. However, it seems like these small firms in smaller cities charge lower rates than larger firms. Although this may be a personal intuition, I also have an understanding that some clients in cities like Vancouver outsource some of their work to these smaller firms to reduce costs, especially with the advancement of technology (for example, email, video conferencing, etc.).

With technology advancing and allowing these smaller firms access to information, services, and clients previously not available, will it make them more competitive in the future? Or, perhaps, will larger firms use technology to access these smaller markets themselves? I have read that some say the work smaller firms do will be replaced, to an extent, with software like LegalZoom and Rocket Lawyer. However, these services seem to have been around for a while and yet clients are still forwarding the work to lawyers that could easily be done by these programs. Is it possible that people still prefer the human interaction that comes with dealing with an actual lawyer or are the programs still too new for a large consumer base to feel comfortable using them?

Posted on

The Trinity Western University Debacle

Though there is still a long way for us to go, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transsexual (LGBT) rights in Canada are some of the most advanced in the world. However, this is a hot topic within the legal profession.

This is a contemporary issue for us in BC, and in Canada as a whole, as Trinity Western University has fought for accreditation as a new law school program. Earlier this year the Ontario Court of Appeal rejected TWU’s bid for recognition in the province. The Court of Appeal referred to TWU’s prohibition on sexual activity between same-sex couples as degrading and discriminatory. The school’s position is that it does not discriminate and all people are welcome to apply to enrol. However, TWU  does require all members of the student body to sign a “community covenant” or code of conduct that forbids sex outside of heterosexual marriage as an admission requirement.

While it appears that religious freedom and equality are in the crosshairs and on a collision course. This is not the case. In actuality it strikes a balance between religious freedom and equality. As intervenors in the case, like the OUTlaws and Out on Bay Street, have stated, the covenant discriminates against LGBTQ persons since it barters their integrity and dignity for an education. This is unacceptable.  Religious freedom is not a green light to discriminate and as the gatekeepers to the legal profession the Law Societies in BC and Ontario, who both denied TWU recognition, are upholding their ethical responsibility. As John Norris, a lawyer representing the Criminal Lawyers Association, which also intervened, said “The time has come to not accept at face value religious justifications for discriminatory conduct in the public sphere.”

This is an important issue for us since sexuality and who people choose to have sexual interactions with is irrelevant in terms of their ability to be proficient lawyers. Therefore, denying a person the opportunity to obtain an education either because they violate the covenant or simply refuse to sign it is a travesty to our justice and education systems.

Unlike other diversity categories, such as race or gender, employers are not required to collect statistics on the number of LGBTQ people they employ. While it may seem that sexuality is not part of the work experience as it is a private experience, the reality is that there is a link between sexuality and identity and we bring our sexuality to work every day without often realizing that we are doing so.

Sexuality pervades the workplaces in many ways that are often unseen. Sexuality is present in the pictures of our partners that we place on our desks, whether we choose to wear a wedding ring, and when co-workers chat about their families or what they did over the weekend with their partner. Further, sexuality is an engaged part of workplace policies. It is often seen, or unseen as the case may be, in policies regarding parental leave, partner benefits, and who is invited to social events.

For those that identify as members of the LGBTQ community, to disclose their sexuality at work can be daunting.  The choice between either disclosing their sexuality (by refusal to sign the Community Covenant at TWU), or denying their dignity and integrity (by signing it) is one that members of the heterosexual community are not forced to engaged with, and therefore it is discriminatory.

Additionally, if TWU’s plans for a law school do go through it will impact the demographics of the Bar in British Columbia the most since it is likely that most graduates will choose to practice in Vancouver. This will impact the culture of the Bar in BC because if the standards for admission to a law school change in the way TWU is proposing with the mandatory signing of the covenant, then the standards within the Bar will change as well since many of their graduates will likely practice in BC. This means that the standards of professional conduct expected by lawyers and enforced by the Law Society of BC will be impacted, thereby affecting the public and the expectation of being served by competent, honorable legal professionals.

Further, there is the possibility of a stigma being associated with graduates of a law school that discriminates against the LGBTQ. Graduates of other law schools could potentially harbor negative feelings against law graduates of TWU for several reasons, including the fact that the TWU law graduates attended a law school that they simply could not attend if they wanted to stay true to themselves and maintain their integrity and dignity; moreover, they could face stigma due to the fact that the TWU law graduates attended a law school that discriminates. The TWU law graduates may even face further stigma from the public at large for this same reason.

Trinity Western University’s bid to have a law school and have its graduates recognized by the Law Societies around the country is a controversial issue that is very relevant to all professionals within the legal community. This is especially the case in BC since it will have a bigger impact on BC law students and the BC bar than most other provinces.

Posted on

India’s Public Interest Litigation – an opportunity for Canada

For many individuals and groups, the prohibitive costs and complexity of the justice system prevents them from bringing forward their case for human rights and social justice. Furthermore, issues of standing can prevent social activists and advocates from filing a lawsuit on behalf of a group facing injustice. One avenue that we can explore in Canada is the expansion of legal standing and who can file a case. In India, public interest litigation (PIL)/social action litigation has allowed third parties to bring forward cases involving constitutional and human rights issues. Furthermore, a case can be filed even on the basis of a letter sent to the court and barriers to filing such a lawsuit are low.

In Canada, pro bono legal services and not-for-profit legal advocacy organizations have played an important role in advocating for economic and environmental justice. Further easing the process for filing cases on matters of public importance could help address social issues. Journalists and concerned citizens could then have another powerful way of raising their voice on these matters.

Some concerns have also been raised. These include PIL cases being used for reasons motivated not by public interest, but for other improper purposes, which leads to a greater number of cases that the judicial system has to deal with. However, these issues can be overcome and solved by ensuring that only cases with merit and with valid issues of concern are allowed to proceed to the next stage.

Analyzing and learning from India’s experience with PIL and exploring its benefits and challenges can allow us to discover potential opportunities for ensuring greater access to justice in Canada. Such a model could help open the doors of the justice system for individuals and organizations on the front-lines of social justice advocacy. We should be exploring ways that we can implement such innovations in our system. This might begin with a pilot program, where we would assess the effectiveness of the system after a reasonable time period.

Justice RS Sodhi, the former Delhi High Court Judge stated the following: “PILs have been able to pick up the grievances of people as a whole, with the objective of en masse improvement of a system. When individuals could not come to court, the courts became obliged to look into a situation as was prevalent and bring improvement in the system.” He also stated that “there are always two sides to a coin. There will be people who will try and exploit [PILs], whether courts allow themselves to be misused…that is where the wisdom of the courts lie.”

The following is a link to a document that describes the issues that a petition for public interest litigation can address in India: http://bit.ly/2bzfGsk. The following link provides basic information about PIL on pages 199-200: http://bit.ly/2dvRsxz. Justice RS Sodhi quoted in: http://bit.ly/2dQ9dew

Posted on

Legal Technology; Leaving Language Behind

Now that we are lawyering in the era of LegalZoom, YouTube how-to tutorials, and the all-encompassing answering power of Google, we can finally claim that we are in the age of infinite accessibility. Or can we?

Just over two years ago, when I received my invitation to come join the decorated field of law, several emotions washed over me; some being feelings of happiness, excitement, and nervousness– but the most interesting emotion I felt was that of utter fear of the unknown. I had no idea what I did not know.

As someone who was entering the legal sphere, should I have known more? Did people around me have more knowledge of the law? Was I an unenlightened anomaly? No, I wasn’t. Regardless of the tools of accessibility that are now only a few clicks away, understanding and applying the law and its many dimensions, without guidance, is very daunting, and often futile. There are many reasons for failure without expert help; however, often the answer is as simple (or as complicated) as a language barrier.

When thinking about bridging legal knowledge gaps in more accessible and efficient ways, one may turn to new technologies and contemporary regimes that are designed to be cash-saving in nature. But as we forge forward from the past into the future, is there enough discussion about the other facets of accessibility? Is the discussion surrounding “Lawyering in the 21st Century” monopolized by ideas of fancy technological innovations without enough regard to social inclusion?

I think it is integral to the process of field-wide technological development to routinely keep an open dialogue regarding accessibility issues faced by diverse populations. Tools such as Dragon Dictate, OneNote, GoToMeeting.com, and, the ever-faithful, Adobe Acrobat Professional, have made the process of “law” drastically more efficient and much less painful; but, we must not lose focus on the end results. While we can continue to develop software applications that will rapidly increase our day-to-day productivity, we need to be aware of making legal knowledge more accessible to all.

What does this look like?

Often times, even native speakers of English and French will have difficulties sifting through dense legal jargon to understand the bare bones of a document– so what about for the individuals to whom English is a second, third, or even fourth language? As immigration continues to grow in Canada, the need for language-diverse access to legal services will only grow; therefore, we need to create technologies that directly focus on overcoming such barriers. Not only do we need help in efficiently translating documents, we need to find better ways of allowing diverse individuals to know where to look when looking for specific legal services. First response platforms, such as websites and telephone resources that advertise the services of firms, the government, legal aid etc. must be easier to understand and more user-friendly in languages beyond English and French.

In large culturally-diverse cities, like Toronto and Vancouver, you will find offices of immigration law sprouting like weeds. For example, just a visit down Gerrard street, one of the many “Little India’s” of the GTA, will prove that there is no shortage of access to immigration law for Hindi, Bengali, Punjabi or Urdu speaking clients. But what happens to Zura, a recent Bruneian immigrant living in Sudbury, Ontario who speaks a broken mixture of Malay and English, when she needs access to a copyright lawyer who can answer questions about her rights regarding a recent creation of a song that she would like to upload to YouTube? She tried to Google it and is unable to find the answers she is looking for. Where does she turn?

Of course, there are translation websites and other tools (that are often hard to use, inaccurate, or carry an extra cost on top of the pending legal fees), but most “legal language service” websites, such as transperfectlegal.com, are directed at “international” issues. While that is a great start for others, Zura, and many other immigrants in Canada, are looking for answers solely regarding Canadian laws. With that being said, legaltranslationsolutions.com states that they provide “high-priority language translation services for all aspects of litigation”; while this is a potentially valid solution for others, it does not work in our case as they solely work with litigation cases. And once again, at a fee.

I am by no means disregarding the current legal language tools in existence; however, we need to keep the dialogue and desire to help individuals in unique legal situations who cannot speak English or French going. We need technological tools that will be accurate with low costs for both legal practitioners and clients. The existing language tools need to be partnered with newer and more innovative solutions that provide for a more inclusive, and frankly more useful, Canadian legal landscape. There are just too many diverse individuals who are looking for legal information and assistance to not focus our lens and realize many issues are left unattended because of language. Just think about the money that is left to be made if the doors to legal services were opened just a hair wider… (kidding!)

Proudly powered by WordPress