We are closing in on the dog days of summer and so I was thinking about what greater efficiency, technology and new players do to large firms in Canada.

If a law firm invests more heavily in process improvement, it becomes more efficient – in other words it can do more work with less people or through a different mix of skill sets. The firm will no longer need to hire huge swaths of new lawyers every year as most of any annual growth will be accommodated either by efficiency gains or by better use of non-lawyer personnel to do . . . [more]

On July 15, 2013, the Ontario Human Rights Commission launched a new policy on removing the 'Canadian experience' barrier in recruiting. A requirement for Canadian experience, even when implemented in good faith, can be an impenetrable barrier in recruiting, selecting, hiring or accrediting, and may result in discrimination.

The long-standing monopoly on delivery of legal services is eroding across Canada. The current of consumer demand is steady and strong, seeking out a broader range of legal services and information, driven largely by cost, supply issues and technological change.

There is evidence of this erosion all around us, both within and without the bounds of the formal legal profession. Paralegals, notaries and agents provide specified legal services across the country, assisting with real estate transactions, wills, traffic offences and more. Courts are recognizing the needs of the self-representing litigant by providing self-help centres and creating online resources. Administrative tribunals . . . [more]

While travelling home from Seattle last week after the AALL conference, which Connie, Kim and I blogged about here and here and here and here, I had an interesting seat mate. More than one interesting person actually. My philosophy is that if you are stuck on a plane and there is someone conversationally inclined, it is a good idea to put down your novel and learn. Every conversation is an opportunity to learn something, whether it is with a student travelling for the first time, someone on the way to visit a grandchild, or someone travelling on a business . . . [more]

Lawyers tend to think of themselves as strong communicators, but they don’t always get their message across to clients.

It doesn’t help that clients aren’t always clear about what they want from lawyers.

This was evident at the mid-winter meeting of the CBA Council, when the Legal Futures Initiative took advantage of the gathering of lawyers from across the country, representing most sizes and types of practice, to find out what lawyers think clients want.

Presented with results from the Initiative’s own survey of client expectations, some lawyers present were a bit taken aback by the idea that clients wanted . . . [more]

JustAccess is a Toronto startup that, as of today, is seeking donations via the Centre for Social Innovation‘s crowdfunding site, Catalyst. The notion is that with a $10,000 infusion JustAccess can launch its own venture, which will:

support plaintiffs and defendants who can’t afford proper access to the justice system[,] share their stories with like minded people and request financial support towards their legal fees.

JustAccess is the work of a team of three people, Sam Saad, Chris Barry, and Kay Dyson Tam, none of whom is a lawyer or has legal training. Saad, the Managing Director . . . [more]

So far we’ve been quiet about the ALM Law Librarians Survey 2013, a survey done of AmLaw 200 law firms each year. The survey results were announced earlier this month, and were officially released at the American Association of Law Libraries conference last Tuesday. I attended the release with analysis by Kevin Iredell, VP of ALMLegal Intelligence. This was the 12th year for the survey, and is typically answered by the head librarian in each firm.

From the related The American Lawyer article by Alan Cohen:

By now, it’s a phrase that law firm library directors likely hear

. . . [more]

Last week, Exigent graciously invited me to a small lunch gathering of Torontonians to discuss the changing legal industry. Exigent, a major LPO based in South Africa, does business predominantly in the UK and Australia and has recently landed in Canada.

First, I’m happy that a major international LPO has finally seen Canada as worthy of investment.

Second, the arrival of Exigent means that change in the Canadian legal industry will – finally – begin to accelerate. Canadian law firms and clients will view the arrival of an international LPO as further validation for using non-Canadian lawyers to do work . . . [more]

Le Service du développement et du soutien à la profession du Barreau du Québec has compiled a series of resource packages associated with different areas of law, skills, knowledge and types of practice to help lawyers thrive in the province of Quebec.

I’ve just received word of — and a copy of — McMillan’s first brochure featuring their pro bono legal services. You can access the announcement here and the brochure itself here.

This got me thinking a bit about the difficulty that you’d face in preparing such a brochure, for example:

• Who is your audience: partners in the firm? the general public? your charity partners? possible new hires? paying clients?
• How glossy do you make it: glossy (as this is), or does that seem too . . . incongruous? sober, like a simple list with the occasional paragraph in black

. . . [more]

One participant on the cbafutures.org website noted that with their own law school tuition at $13,000 a year, the pool of applicants with the means to attend shrinks tremendously. Indeed, some new students will pay almost $30,000 in tuition in order to attend their first year of law school.

But so what? A lawyer is a lawyer is a lawyer, right? Everyone who goes to law school has the same education, and could conceivably serve the same constituency.

The question is really about the value of diversity. We’re used to thinking of diversity in terms of gender equality, and the . . . [more]

In Ontario, awarding costs (compensation for legal fees) is always within the discretion of the adjudicator. However, there is a presumption that the losing party will be ordered to pay a portion of the successful party’s legal costs.

Many people who are unfamiliar with the litigation process think that suing every possible party is usually a good idea. This strategy can backfire in a significant way in light of the “loser pays” system. In some instances a plaintiff may be successful at trial against one defendant, but lose against multiple other defendants who the plaintiff has named and, in the . . . [more]