• Globe Article
• POL's Response
• Petition Text
• Exec. Summary
• Downloads in .pdf:
   • Regulatory Framework
   • Petition Text

A bitter, 15-year war between Ontario lawyers and paralegals is close to being settled under a plan that would see paralegals accredited, licensed and disciplined by the Law Society of Upper Canada, the governing body of Ontario lawyers.

Paralegals who refuse to co-operate or who fail competency tests would be barred from working in any court or tribunal, according to details of the plan obtained by The Globe and Mail.

"The significance of this is enormous," Vern Krishna, treasurer of the law society, said in an interview. "It is the first time we have managed to get all the players to the table and arrived at a consensus. I don't know of any other model like this in the country or, indeed, in the Commonwealth."

About 1,000 paralegals operate in Ontario, some of them through well-administrated franchises and others in the shadows. They typically appear in courts and tribunals to deal with traffic offences, land-use regulations or other low-end legal work.

Currently, no formal training is required. Under the new arrangements, anyone wishing to be an accredited paralegal would first have to complete two years of community-college training followed by six months of mentoring under a lawyer or accredited paralegal. Those who are already in practice could be "grandfathered" into the accreditation scheme, provided they pass proficiency exams.

Paralegals have been a perennial burr under the saddle of lawyers, many of whom resent them for siphoning off business and periodically making errors that reflect poorly on the entire legal system.

The two groups have a long history of denouncing one another in the media and fighting in the courts.

"I think the war will be over," predicted Paul Dray, president of the Professional Paralegal Association of Ontario.

"We are not going to get everybody on every side to agree, but we have consensus."

The plan was hammered out over the past few months by top-level representatives from the law society, the Ontario Bar Association, the Advocates' Society, the province's 47 county and district law associations, and Mr. Dray's organization, which is made up of several paralegal groups.

The negotiations, brokered by former Ontario attorney-general Charles Harnick and lawyer Caroline Pinto, have been closely watched by current Attorney-General David Young.

"He is fully in the loop," Mr. Krishna said. "He has been very helpful, co-operative and encouraging."

How paralegals stand to benefit from the plan is simple.

They would gain public credibility, be assigned defined areas in which to operate and witness the banishment of incompetents from their ranks.

"This is a major, major step toward regulation," Mr. Dray said in an interview yesterday.

"We are suggesting that licensing and accreditation be mandatory. You are not going to be able to practise if you aren't."

The main obstacle to the plan is likely to come from a hard-line faction of lawyers who remain hostile to sharing the financial pie with individuals who have considerably less training.

Lawyers who support the plan will have to persuade the hard-liners that paralegals are here to stay, and that much is to be gained from controlling the quality of their work.

"I think there could be an emotional reaction, but once we get past that, there are obvious advantages to the legal profession," Mr. Krishna said.

"Paralegals are not going to go away. In an unregulated environment, they are going to do exactly what they want to do. Some will do it reasonably well, and some will not do it well at all. Eventually, it tarnishes the image of the whole legal-services market."

Mr. Dray said most paralegals are just as disturbed by the semi-competent fringe of their profession as the lawyers are.

"What frightens me is that these people are doing the work now, but they are unregulated," he said. "They can continue to operate that way unless the lawyers buy into this plan. That is the big downside for the public."

Under the new system, paralegals would be divided into two categories: those who can appear in court as "advocates," and those who would perform office work such as incorporations and some uncontested divorces.

Candidates would also have to pass specialized exams and meet the same "good character" requirements as lawyers currently do.

(Mr. Dray said the province's first bachelor of applied arts course in paralegal services has just been approved for Humber College, and more are expected to follow.)

The plan will be unveiled tomorrow at the monthly meeting of the law society's governing council. After it has been debated within the profession for several months, it will come to a vote in the council.

The new deal

A proposed truce between Ontario paralegals and the legal profession envisions the following:

Legislation would be passed by the province placing paralegals under the authority of the Law Society of Upper Canada.

It would become an offence for a paralegal to operate without a licence or practise outside his or her area of accreditation.

A standing committee of the law society would work out the details of accreditation, testing and licensing. The committee, which would include roughly an equal number of lawyers and paralegals, would also administer disciplinary measures and create rules for keeping trust accounts.

As is already the case with lawyers, paralegals would be obliged to carry insurance and to pay into an insurance scheme for compensating clients who are victimized by inadequate paralegal work.

Paralegals would be divided into two categories with different accreditation procedures. The first, known as the "advocacy" group, would be commissioners of oaths and enjoy a limited form of solicitor-client confidentiality. They could also handle all litigation involving Small Claims Court, offences under the Provincial Offences Act and matters before virtually every provincial board, agency or tribunal.

The second group -- "non-advocacy" paralegals -- could work under the auspices of a lawyer using a formal affiliation agreement between the two. They would be confined to working on legal matters such as preparing basic wills, incorporations and powers of attorney. They could also perform certain residential real-estate transactions and divorces.