As legal costs increase and individuals more commonly attempt to represent themselves in Court the concept of the ghost-writer counsel becomes common. People have a lawyer help them with materials which they then file under their own name.
In such a circumstance the lawyer, while owing a duty to the party using their services, does not have any official connection to the case. On occasion judges hearing motions find this problematic and inquire as to who the lawyer is – today’s decision in Domi v. Royal Bank of Canada, 2010 ONCA 76 suggests that is not appropriate:
[1] [The motions judge] was generous to the appellant in that she effectively allowed her to proceed with almost all of her causes of action, provided they were properly pleaded. Unfortunately, the appellant has not taken up this opportunity and has instead brought an appeal that with one exception, is, in our view, without merit.
[2] The one exception relates to paragraph 4 of the order, in which the motion judge required the appellant to provide the respondent with the name of counsel from whom she was receiving legal advice.
[3] We see no reason for this order.
3 comments:
Doesn't it seem passing strange that the law, the very basis of our society, is mediated by a priest-like order that supplies both the judges of action and the defence and offence? We have allowed these priests to convince us that the law is so complicated and the chance at justice so depends on the knowledge and skill of a lawyer that we are actively discouraged from representing ourselves. Justice is something the average middle class citizen can't afford. The rich can, and the poor get funding, but me, I can't hope for justice without potential ruin financially.
The church used to mediate our relationship to god but we found that we could just as easily interpret the bible as any priest. Complications were often manufactured or bloody pointless. Reading the history of the council of Nicea and the arguments on trinity vs created being makes me wonder if lawyers are really all that much better. After all, who care how many angels can fit on the head of a pin? When judges say that this or that must be disallowed lest the administration of justice be brought into disprepute I have to wonder what makes them think their administration of justice has any good reputation left? In my circles very few people esteem judges, lawyers, or the way the law is administered.
We desperately need justice reform to remove the political motivations and financial barriers to an equal society before the law. Only then will there be justice for all.
What if her counsel was a paralegal, or one of the kitchen-table counselors, or even a law student?
Post a Comment