Scanned, recopied or Internet copy, if there are errors, please e-mail me with corrections: Opening comments: More at the end. Toronto Star - Mar. 5, 2007 - Letters COURTING HIGH COSTS The price of trying to right a wrong is no doubt high, but there are lawyers who take on clients for free March 3. While your article is accurate in that the cost of litigation can be prohibitive and is a factor in determining whether some litigants decide to proceed, it lacks an acknowledgment of the lawyers who regularly represent litigants on a pro-bono basis to assist those who would not otherwise be able to access the legal system. Perhaps more importantly, it fails to acknowledge that most lawyers routinely adjust their fees downward to ensure that their clients perceive that they have been able to access our legal system on a basis that reflects the success of litigation. For example, I would reduce my legal bill of $10,000 if my client was only awarded $10,000 with legal costs. Most lawyers embrace the crucial role that they play in the legal system and understand that a legal victory in the courts, accompanied by a legal bill that has the ramification of extreme financial hardship or bankruptcy to a client, does not equate with access to justice. As a small-town lawyer who charges $200 per hour, even I have to shake my head when Mark Arnold apparently says with a straight face, "I doubt I could afford to hire myself at a modest $400 an hour." Perhaps this is modest for Toronto, but it is certainly not reflective of most lawyers who practise outside of larger urban areas, where experienced lawyers' rates typically are no more than $300 per hour. I acknowledge that legal costs can be substantial even when lawyers approach their billing in a modest fashion. Access to justice is an extremely important issue for Canadians. However, the vast majority of lawyers ensure that the vast majority of Canadians can access our legal system. Stephen Roth, Stratford, Ont. In the famous Amistad case of 1841, former U.S. president John Quincy Adams came out of retirement to passionately argue before the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of a group of kidnapped Africans led by one who came to be known as Cinque. Adams said that justice is the constant and perpetual will to secure to everyone his own right. The festering sore within the administration of legal aid is indicative of a larger malaise that has long afflicted the administration of justice: the abandonment of the constant and perpetual will to secure to everyone his own right. A government that does not recognize disparities in the administration of justice with respect to aboriginals, blacks, women and the poor will undoubtedly have difficulty fostering justice. Legal aid may well be on the same road to extinction as the Court Challenges Program of Canada. Nelson Mandela said in his autobiography, Long Walk to Freedom, that "no one truly knows a nation until one has been inside its jails. A nation should not be judged by how it treats its highest citizens, but its lowest ones." Stephanie Montague, Mississauga As a Toronto lawyer who has practised in the area of family law for the past 14 years, I must take issue with the front-page tag line that reads, "$150,000 price tag for average family-law case." While this figure might make good newspaper copy, it is misleading. The actual story to which the $150,000 figure corresponded referred to a "five-to-eight day custody trial," which is not an "average" family-law case. In Toronto, the family courts have gone to great lengths to assist litigants in keeping a lid on their legal fees. Settlement is not only encouraged by family court judges, but the family-law rules impose punitive cost sanctions on parties whose conduct leads to higher conflict and unnecessary (and costly) court appearances. A trial will not be scheduled until there has been a settlement conference. The vast majority of cases settle before trial. Jeff Rechtshaffen, Toronto When justice is not attainable for all but only for the rich, the justice system ought to be renamed the "injustice system." It seems to me that this system exists only to line the pockets of overpriced lawyers who forgot the concept of justice somewhere between their law degrees and their first Mercedes. I have lost thousands of hard-earned dollars myself because I could not afford to hire a lawyer to fight on my behalf. I mean, really, does anyone know a lawyer who makes a modest living? My apologies to any lawyer with integrity who charges a reasonable rate. You're a dying breed. Joan Willis Joyce, Toronto Toronto Star - Mar. 6, 2007 - Letters Teaching lawyers a few new tricks Justice for some, not all You can't argue with the huge fees lawyers charge. There is a great demand for their services and they charge accordingly. So what to do about it? Let's look to the financial sector. It is an extremely accessible system. You can use tax software to easily do your taxes without an accountant. You can use online banking and manage your own investments and RRSPs. There are financial advisers out there, but the system as a whole remains accessible. In the same way, we could make the justice system more accessible for simple cases. We could have legal documents in clear and plain language. We could increase the use of technology and of arbitrators. We could also increase the supply of lawyers (I'm sure there's a joke in there somewhere). Yamin Bismilla, Ottawa Toronto Star - Mar. 13, 2007 - Letters Golden years spent fighting for justice Editorial, March 11. Your editorial that quotes Supreme Court Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin shows that there are learned people who understand that access to justice is being denied to many and that Canada is not the just society that many of us wish it to be. Seniors who have been financially victimized often lack the resources, stamina and time to undertake civil litigation that is generally long and arduous. Large companies vigorously defend situations that, to many of us, appear to be morally indefensible. Defence strategies of delay and legal manoeuvring run up costs and consume time with the result that seniors have little hope of reaching a successful conclusion in court. So many settle for pennies on the dollar. I have spoken with hundreds of victims of white-collar crime who have been virtually robbed of their savings by the investment industry when rules are broken with impunity and at times fraud and forgery perpetrated. One victim, a widow, lost $1.5 million. The facts seem evident that there was abundant wrongdoing. However, the pursuit of the case was costly and time-consuming. She settled out of court for one-third of what she lost because she felt she could survive on that and wanted to enjoy some of the rest of her life. In the case of Armand Laflamme, who lost his life's savings, it took 10 years to gain a Supreme Court decision. The initial lower-court decision in his favour was appealed. He was 61 when he started and 71 when he finished. However, he looked much older, as litigation is stressful for most seniors. He lived only a few years longer. From 61 onwards, he spent most of the rest of his life fighting for justice rather than being able to enjoy his golden years. Is this a just society? Stan Buell, President, Small Investor Protection Association, Markham Home Page - Main Table of Contents - Back up a page - Back to Top [COMMENTS BY DON B. - ] |
Your Financial Donations are Greatly Appreciated The • |