New PLEI Resources From Manitoba Courts

Manitoba Courts has just recently posted a number of videos to assist self-represented litigants (SRLs) and other justice system participants on its website. The videos released to date include:

  • What to expect when attending court
  • The Manitoba Provincial Court
  • The Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench
  • The Manitoba Court of Appeal
  • What to expect at jury selection
  • How to fill out a Petition or Petition for Divorce

Along with each video is posted a list of links to other relevant resources.

The site notes that the next phase in the video development will focus on videos that are more tutorial in nature (presumably along the lines of the Petition video).

This is a much needed new resource for Manitobans seeking access to justice, particularly those who don’t have the benefit of a lawyer’s assistance, and an excellent addition to the recently redesigned Manitoba Courts website.



  1. SRL’s becoming permanent: Is it the intention of those law firms having clients who can still afford legal advice services, that such self-help programs and revised court procedures to help self-represented litigants (SRL’s) become permanent features of our courts? The same suspicion is deserved by “alternative business structures” (ABS) proposals. (LSUC’s ABS Discussion Paper should be replied to, before Dec. 31st.) The ABS proposals will help such law firms make legal services more attractive for their clients, who won’t be people who will be SRL’s. But they will do nothing to make legal advise services affordable for people who cannot afford such services. All that the ABS proposals will give them is the automation of routine legal services, but not any improvement in the affordability of legal advice services. Such inadequate assistance to SRL’s and unaffordable legal advice services, should be declared by the law societies as being merely temporary, because they are going to make all legal services affordable again.
    But unfortunately, Canada’s law societies have not accepted the proposition that the laws that give them the powers to regulate the legal profession, impose a duty to make legal services affordable.
    If in fact the law societies cannot make them affordable, they have no purpose, in which case, a new management structure or agency needs to be imposed in place of present law society management structures.