Report to Convocation November 22 , 2012 Paralegal Standing Committee
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Convocation - Paralegal Standing Committee Report TAB 7 Report to Convocation November 22nd, 2012 Paralegal Standing Committee Committee Members Cathy Corsetti, Chair Susan McGrath, Vice-Chair Marion Boyd Robert Burd Paul Dray Ross Earnshaw Robert Evans Michelle Haigh Jacqueline Horvat Dow Marmur Malcolm M. Mercer Kenneth Mitchell Jan Richardson Purpose of Report: Information Prepared by the Policy Secretariat 319 Convocation - Paralegal Standing Committee Report Julia Bass 416 947 5228 TABLE OF CONTENTS For Information Five Year Review of Paralegal Regulation............................................................. TAB 7.1 Working Group on Exemptions.............................................................................. TAB 7.2 2 320 Convocation - Paralegal Standing Committee Report Committee Process 1. The Committee met on November 8th, 2012. Committee members present were Cathy Corsetti (Chair), Susan McGrath (Vice-Chair), Marion Boyd, Robert Burd (by telephone), Paul Dray, Ross Earnshaw, Robert Evans, Michelle Haigh, Jacqueline Horvat, Dow Marmur, Malcolm M. Mercer and Kenneth Mitchell (by telephone). Staff members attending were Robert Lapper (CEO), Terry Knott, Sheena Weir, Sally Ashton and Julia Bass. 3 321 Convocation - Paralegal Standing Committee Report TAB 7.1 FIVE YEAR REVIEW OF PARALEGAL REGULATION 2. Section 63.1 of the Law Society Act required two reviews of the implementation of paralegal regulation, one to be conducted by the Law Society, and one to be conducted by a reviewer who is neither a lawyer nor a paralegal, appointed by the Attorney General. At Convocation in June, the Law Society delivered the first of these reports to the Attorney General. On August 3rd, the Attorney General appointed Mr David J. Morris, M.B.A. of Kingston, Ontario to conduct the further review. Mr Morris has now completed his report, shown at TAB 7.1.1 and on the Attorney General’s website at: http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/paralegal_review/default.asp. 3. Mr Morris’ report is complimentary about the work of the Law Society in paralegal regulation, stating “By any objective measure, the introduction [of regulation] has been a remarkable success”, “satisfaction levels are also generally high among members of the public,” “regulation has elevated the reputation and image of the paralegal sector” and “the Law Society has proven to be the appropriate regulatory authority.” 4. The report makes the following key recommendations: • That exemptions to Law Society regulation for those providing legal services be minimized; • That the governance structure of the Law Society be amended to reflect its requisite impartiality to the professions it regulates; • That exclusionary language in the statutory environment that serves to impede the policy objectives of regulation be amended; • That initiatives be undertaken to improve the standard of learning, professional competence and professional conduct of the paralegal sector, as well as public awareness of the sector; and • That the scope of permissible paralegal practice remain as it is pending improvements in the standards of learning, professional competence and professional conduct of the paralegal sector. 5. These recommendations are consistent with positions that the Law Society has taken on the issues. Many of the other comments in the report are thoughtful and merit further study. The Paralegal Standing Committee will be further considering the report in detail. 322 Convocation - Paralegal Standing Committee Report TAB 7.1.1 Report to the Attorney General of Ontario Report of Appointee’s Five-Year Review of Paralegal Regulation in Ontario Pursuant to Section 63.1 of the Law Society Act November2012 Prepared and Respectfully Submitted by: David J. Morris, MBA Executive Summary 323 Convocation - Paralegal Standing Committee Report Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General ISBN 978-1-4606-0514-1 (PDF) © Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2012 Disponible en français 324 Convocation - Paralegal Standing Committee Report In the interest of striking some measure of balance between enhancing public access to justice and ensuring protection for those receiving legal advice from non-lawyers, on May 1, 2007, persons providing paralegal services in Ontario joined the province’s lawyers under regulation of the Law Society of Upper Canada. Amendments to the Law Society Act that introduced paralegal regulation included the requirement that two reviews be conducted following its fifth anniversary, one by the Law Society and the other by an appointee of the Attorney General who is neither a lawyer nor paralegal. Each review was to consider the manner in which paralegals were regulated during the first five years, and the effect of regulation on paralegals and on members of the public. The Law Society delivered the report of its review to the Attorney General on June 28, 2012. This report presents the findings of the appointee review. The findings and recommendations presented in this report are based on a review of relevant documents and commentary that preceded and followed the introduction of regulation, including the Law Society’s two- and five-year reviews. Additionally, submissions were solicited from paralegals, lawyers, legal organizations and members of the public. It is appropriate to view the first five years of regulation as the introduction of regulation – of getting the mechanics of it firmly established.By any objective measure, the introduction has been a remarkable success. There is evident consensus in the province’s legal community that regulation has elevated the reputation and image of the paralegal sector, and that the Law Society has proven to be the appropriate regulatory authority. Research commissioned by the Law Society indicates that paralegals are generally satisfied with the regulatory framework and how it was introduced. Satisfaction levels are also generally high among members of the public who have consumed paralegal services. The Law Society acknowledges that, despite its efforts to date, awareness in the general, non-consuming public has not kept pace with changes in the legal services market. n fact, in a submission to this review, a veteran lawyer described his challenges in determining the permissible scope of paralegal practice. The Paralegal Sector in a Snapshot As of mid-September 2012, there were 4,301active paralegal licensees in the province, with another 596 inactive and former licensed practitioners. Remarkably, one-quarter of all licences issued have been issued since January 1, 2011. This leaves the sector somewhat evenly split between “old hands” who were licensed through introductory provisions of regulation (e.g. “grandparenting”), and recent graduates of accredited community college programs. The split tilts increasingly in favour of the latter. 2 | Page 325 Convocation - Paralegal Standing Committee Report Major areas of paralegal practice include Small Claims Court, Provincial Offences Act matters before the Ontario Court of Justice, Landlord and Tenant Board cases, and cases before administrative tribunals such as the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board. Forty per cent of paralegals who responded to a Law Society-commissioned survey are in private practice as sole practitioners. One-quarter are in private legal/paralegal practice as employees. Another 20 per cent list themselves as “Otherwise employed: Other employment.” The Changed Role of the Law Society As the regulator of two complementary professions, the Law Society’s duty to facilitate access to justice for the people of Ontario does not simply expand upon its role as Ontario’s centuries- old, self-regulating college of lawyers, it profoundly alters it. It is now incumbent upon the Law Society to drive the provision of legal services to the most accessible, appropriate level of the professions it regulates. Its challenge is in doing so without compromising professional standards or protection of the public interest. With the mechanics of paralegal regulation firmly - and admirably - established, the opportunity presents itself for the Law Society to more directly address the challenge inherent in its legislated duties. This observation frames my findings and the recommendations that I offer - many of which are offered in support of initiatives that are already underway. Summary of Key Recommendations • That exemptions to Law Society regulation for those providing legal services be minimized; • That the governance structure of the Law Society be amended to reflect its requisite impartiality to the professions it regulates; • That exclusionary language in the statutory environment that serves to impede the policy objectives of regulation be amended; • That initiatives be undertaken to improve the standard of learning, professional competence and professional conduct of the paralegal sector, as well as public awareness of the sector; and • That the scope of permissible paralegal practice remain as it is pending improvements in the standards of learning, professional competence and professional conduct of the paralegal sector. 3 | Page 326 Convocation - Paralegal Standing Committee Report 4 | Page 327 Convocation - Paralegal Standing Committee Report Contents 1. Requirement for this report ....................................................................................................6 2. Methodology ..........................................................................................................................8 3. Background to Regulation