Civil Reform: It invokes the kind of discourse our industry is quick to dismiss as rhetorical rather than pragmatic. At a recent trade conference in Toronto, however, both the bench and the bar spoke candidly about not only the need for reform, but the responsibility to facilitate it. To mitigate the rhetoric, the question remains: What are we talking about when we talk about civil reform?
The answer invariably involves a discussion of the principles underlying access to justice. While the long trial lists, delayed motion dates, and often unnecessary procedural steps are frustrating for lawyers and their bottom-line, their clients foot the proverbial bill. As discussed by Chief Justice Strathy during the 2014 Opening of the Courts Ceremony: “Our justice system has become so cumbersome and expensive that it is inaccessible to many of our own citizens.”
To the extent that systemic reform is required, so, too, is a reciprocal commitment and cooperation from the bar. Simply put, it is our duty to both reduce costs and to increase access. But, how?
According to the Toronto Bench and Bar Committee, one way to assist in civil reform is perhaps the most fundamental: To commence proceedings only in the jurisdiction in which they should be properly brought. The message from the Committee is clear: Neither convenience nor the process-serving savings are justifiable reasons to contribute to an already saturated court system. Going forward, the court will be extremely reluctant to allow the scheduling of trials in Toronto for actions that should have been properly brought elsewhere. To save costs and time, counsel are well-advised to ensure that originating processes are being filed in the proper jurisdiction.
Another important recommendation from the Committee involves pretrial appointments. In this regard, the bench has indicated a conscious prioritization of resolution by way of its active involvement in facilitating reasonable prospects of settlement. Those practicing in Toronto will likely welcome this shift in attitude, however lawyers will also have to do their part. Counsel should carefully prepare for pretrial hearings by attending with reports served and clear instructions obtained, having already and fully turned their minds to the issues at hand.
Ultimately, the bar shares the onus to respond to the legitimate issues that underlie Chief Justice Strathy’s remarks. Above are simply two practical suggestions that can (and should) be implemented in order to elevate the issue of civil reform from a rhetorical debate to a pragmatic and effective approach to litigation.
Sonia Nijjar
Latest posts by Sonia Nijjar (see all)
- Facilitating Civil Reform in Toronto - May 3, 2016