Today I went to the dentist – an experience that most people loathe as much as going to a lawyer.

As I lounged in discomfort, I had several thoughts:

First, I knew exactly how much I was going to pay for the professional services being rendered. Most dental work is done on a fixed fee basis, no matter how long, or how little time, the procedure may take. Some work, could, as my dentist explained to me take longer, but it all balances out in the end by other quicker work.

Small legal practitioners like myself understand the concept of . . . [more]

Adam Smith, Esq. is on a roll. Or at least, Bruce MacEwen, author of the Adam Smith, Esq. blog is. His blog posts, “Growth is Dead” have been an on-going series looking at the changes to “BigLaw” since the economic problems of 2008.

Revenues of firms have significantly dropped since that time. One pressure is coming from clients with respect to pricing. From Part 1 of the blog:

Simply put, clients are pushing back as never before. Among other things, they are:

• serious, for the first time, about alternative fee arrangements, caps and blended rates, rate freezes, and so on

. . . [more]

Yes it is possible.

And from it follows increased access to justice, as night follows day.

Re-reading Richard Susskind’s book “The End of Lawyers?” this weekend, I was struck by how straightforward it is.

Advocacy cannot be replaced by improved technology or outsourcing. It is like an element: it cannot be further reduced. Quality advocacy is the result of the proper analysis of facts, and preparation. It may be improved by experience, but the advocate must have dissected out what has to be proved, and must know the factual record cold. There are no shortcuts.

The client cannot expect to . . . [more]

If you took in the #articling discussions on twitter today, you’ll know that the debate has been postponed until November 22nd, and that the opinions on this issue are incredibly strong. Lawyers have obviously had a lot of time to reflect on the value of the articling process, what it provided them personally, and the value it provides to the profession. So intense were the discussions, that it trended in Canada on Twitter (in the number one position) for well over an hour.

I’d like to share a couple of random observations here, as a non-lawyer who has worked . . . [more]

What if a law society created an articling task force that canvassed the view of stakeholders over the course of many months, prepared an interim report, then a final report and then asked for a vote.

One would think that a vote would then take place, no?

No.

Today the Law Society of Upper Canada’s Bencher debate was hijacked by a group of Benchers who – wait for it – wanted even more time to study the issues and seek stakeholder input.

The climate of fear in Convocation was palpable as a number of Benchers seemed completely unprepared to vote . . . [more]

♫ Change
Now it’s time for change
Nothing stays the same
No it’s time for change… ♫

Lyrics and Music by Nikki Sixx, Donna McDaniel, recorded by Mötley Crüe.

On Oct 24-25, the second Canadian Forum on Court Technology will be held in Montreal. The challenge that this forum will be facing is how to bring about meaningful change to a dispute resolution process that has been resistant to change. Of course, the voices demanding increased access to justice and responsiveness to the needs of society are only getting louder. The factors for the courts to consider are . . . [more]

The Law Society of Upper Canada (LSUC) is dealing with a highly contentious issue – the future of articling in Ontario. After consulting with stakeholders and reading submissions from across the province, Laurie Pawlitza, the former LSUC Treasurer described the feedback as “disparate” in the 2012 Canadian Bar Association (CBA) National Student edition.

The Articling Task Force released their Final Report this week, . A preliminary cost assessment of the minority view’s preliminary cost is also available. But what is the Law Society to do, with such polarized views on the subject?

Public engagement theory has steadily moved . . . [more]

On my recent trip to London, England, it was arranged for me to be part of a panel discussion at Middle Temple Hall, one of the oldest legal buildings in London. Indeed, the room in which I spoke (Parliament Chamber) hosted the very first performance of Twelfth Night in 1602. By way of background, Middle Temple is one of four Inns of Court in London that are able to call men and women to the Bar.

So there I was, at the beating old heart of the common law, criticizing the current model of legal services delivery; suggesting that it . . . [more]

The Articling Task Force reported this morning.

The Executive Summary reads: . . . [more]

“…being in accordance with the actual state or conditions; conforming to reality or fact…real; genuine; authentic; being or reflecting the essential or genuine character of something.”

I was in court last week and obtained an order that transferred real property from the registered owner to my client as an equitable remedy based on a constructive trust. There was some urgency: the property was uninsured and there was a perceived danger of other pending judgments against the legal owner which might be registered against the property.

Recognizing this, the judge wrote out a judgment by hand (about half a page of . . . [more]

If I had any doubt that the UK was the absolute undisputed centre of legal innovation, the past 5 days I’ve spent in London have certainly laid that to rest.

Earlier this week I came across Nigel Spencer, Director of Learning and Development – EME for Reed Smith. Nigel is constantly re-thinking the trainee model (for Canadians read: articling model) and other professional development opportunities for the firm. Fortunately, he has the freedom and support of firm management to do some truly exciting things. Thanks to Maeve Jackson for the introduction!

In particular, he has a strong desire to ensure . . . [more]

Work to reform the Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct of Quebec lawyers is underway. A preliminary draft is currently being distributed to members of the Quebec Bar Association for comments by October 27, 2012.