Canada’s online legal magazine.

Archive for the ‘Legal Ethics’ Columns

Shadow AI: A Growing Problem for Canadian Courts

Many generative AI tools are relatively easy to access and use. For example, no technical expertise is required to pull up and type a prompt into ChatGPT, and the most basic version is free. This reality has led to a significant amount of “shadow AI” use within organizations; that is, uses of AI that are not formally approved or are even contrary to formal policies. Concerns about shadow AI commonly arise in the context of private companies, with some studies indicating that over 80% of workers report using unapproved tools at work. Much less discussed – and worthy of far . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Ethics, Legal Technology

Appellate Hypertrophy in the Canadian Justice System

Is the re-examination of past decisions sapping the justice system’s capacity to hear and decide legal disputes at first instance? Our system has numerous ways to reopen past decisions and let a new set of adjudicators and advocates root around for errors: review, reconsideration, and motions to set aside or reopen as well as appeal itself.

These re-examinations constitute a necessary organ, which serves essential functions in the justice system: correcting legal errors, delineating and refining legal rules, making new common law, and ensuring that administrative decision-makers do not exceed their jurisdiction. And yet these procedures have arguably been allowed . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Ethics

Again, Why? the Big Picture of the Alberta Regulated Professions Neutrality Act

In my previous column on the Alberta Regulated Professions Neutrality Act,[1] I focused on subtle details of the Act and the important implications of those details for how the Act worked and what it did.[2] In this column, I focus instead on the major flaw of the Act, which flaw is glaringly obvious but seems to have received relatively little attention and prompted relatively little pushback outside the legislative assembly.[3] Nothing in this column is revolutionary or imaginative or even particularly original. But it is worth emphasizing nonetheless. While the Act has implications for many regulated . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Ethics

The Lingua Franca of the Legal Profession

…All my notions – notions of good and evil, of pleasant and unpleasant, of funny and serious, of ugly and beautiful – are essentially middle-class notions; my taste in books and food and clothes, my sense of honour, my table manners, my turns of speech, my accent, even the characteristic movements of my body, are the products of a special kind of upbringing and a special niche about half-way up the social hierarchy.

-George Orwell, The Road to Wigan Pier

Many in the legal profession who came from a working- or middle-class background can relate intimately to Orwell’s account of . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Education, Legal Ethics, Legal Information

Resisting the Echo Chamber: AI-Assisted Judgment Writing and the Risk of Homogenization

Artificial intelligence is making its way into courtrooms around the world, and not always for the better. Judges have been caught embedding AI-generated fictitious case references in judicial decisions, in Canada and internationally; and there are no doubt other, more subtle, machine delusions slipping into case law undetected. Judicial misuse of AI tools has profound consequences for the administration of justice and for public confidence in the courts. But a less obvious threat also deserves our attention: a growing body of research indicates that large language models (LLMs) have a homogenizing effect on writing and analysis, meaning that judges’ . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Ethics

Why? the Details of the Alberta Regulated Professions Neutrality Act

The Alberta legislature passed two bills in December 2025 that are particularly important to the regulation of the legal profession. The many separate ramifications of the Justice Statutes Amendment Act, 2025, some of which I have previously written about,[1] are important though perhaps not immediately obvious. The Regulated Professions Neutrality Act, in contrast, has a clearly unifying purpose that is readily apparent – but its nuances and details deserve more attention.[2]

My view has long been that the regulation of the extra-professional conduct of lawyers, including their expression, is an important aspect of the role of . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Ethics

Ontario v Doe: The 30 Hour Lawsuit

If you think civil lawsuits take way too long in Canada, you’re in good company. But one high-profile suit recently went from claim to final hearing in less than 30 hours. Ontario v Doe was certainly an unusual case, and one that has been widely debated for reasons that have nothing to do with civil procedure. And yet it also offers three important lessons for people who care about making justice speedier in mainstream civil litigation.

The Facts: A Last-Minute Injunction

A rally was planned for the afternoon of Saturday March 14th, on University Avenue in downtown Toronto. Just . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Ethics

There’s Got to Be a Better Way! Law Societies’ Approach to the Regulation of Lawyers With Mental Health Issues

In recent years we have made significant strides in recognizing the prevalence of mental health issues amongst lawyers and attempting to defeat the stigma that discourages lawyers from disclosing their challenges and seeking support.

It is now well-known and accepted that “legal professionals are almost twice as likely to experience mental health issues like anxiety, stress, depression and addiction as the general population”.[1]

Leaders in our profession are speaking up. In 2022, former Chief Justice of Ontario George R. Strathy published a thoughtful paper acknowledging this reality and calling for top-down change in our approach to mental health as . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Ethics

Towards Transparency: Why Not a Court AI Register?

Canadian courts and judges are using AI in their work. Not all of them, but some of them. A small number of courts have publicly announced formal pilots or adoption of AI tools (see, e.g., here and here); other courts have authorized judges to use certain AI tools but haven’t (to my knowledge) made any public announcements about these authorizations; and, finally, individual judges are experimenting with using AI tools in their work on ad hoc, generally undisclosed (at least to the public) bases. I am not aware of any judicial decision in Canada in which a judge has . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Ethics

The Time’s Not Right: Advocacy When a Tribunal Is Delayed or Imposes Short Timelines

A professional legal advocate occupies a unique position, interposed as they are between the justice system on one hand, and their client on the other. Each advocate has a duty of commitment to the client’s cause, and must resolutely pursue the client’s legitimate goals using all legal means. At the same time, the advocate is an officer of the court and must help the legal system accomplish its own objectives. The need to reconcile duties to client with duties to the law comes up frequently in the practice of law, and pervades the study of legal ethics.

The balancing act . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Ethics

Withdrawal Is Mandatory Where a Client Persistently Breaches Court Orders

What should, and must, a lawyer do when their client persistently breaches court orders, either deliberately or recklessly, despite the firm advice of the lawyer that such breaches must cease?

While I am not qualified to comment on the US context, where such breaches by the federal government are allegedly occurring repeatedly and on a very large scale,[1] I would like to take this opportunity to reflect on what a lawyer in a Canadian jurisdiction should and must do in a parallel situation.

First, why does this lawyer have a problem, and what is that problem? A lawyer cannot . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Ethics

Contingency Planning for Lawyers

Sole practitioners in Ontario are required by the Law Society to maintain a contingency plan for their practice in case they unexpectedly become unable to practice law or meet their professional obligations.

Although this has been the case since January 1, 2025, the first time we need to confirm with the LSO that we have such a plan in place is on our Annual Reports that are due on March 31, 2026. Naturally, this month I have received numerous inquiries from clients and colleagues about these contingency plans.

As By-Law 7.1 is not always easy reading, I thought a column . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Ethics

3li_EnFr_Wordmark_W

This project has been made possible in part by the Government of Canada | Ce projet a été rendu possible en partie grâce au gouvernement du Canada