On October 3, 2004 Council of the OBA unanimously agreed "That OBA endorse the role of the Law Society of Upper Canada with respect to Paralegals".

What follows is an excerpt from the report to council presented by Virginia McLean, Vice Chair of the Paralegal Task Force.

OBA President, Ian Kirby, OBA Task Force Vice Chair, Virginia MacLean, Task Force and staff resource Anne Parsons participated in the September 29, 2004 meeting of the Legal Organizations Group (LOG) convened by the Law Society’s Task Force on Paralegal Regulation. The LOG Group comprises representatives from the Ontario Bar Association, the Advocates Society, the Law Society of Upper Canada, CDLPA, TLA, OTLA, and the Women’s Law Association of Ontario. Bill Simpson chaired the meeting. The following is a brief summary of the meeting.

On September 23, 2004 with a vote of 43 to 4 Convocation approved the Task Force on Paralegal Regulation report which contained recommendations for a regulatory model for paralegals that would provide consumer protection. Some of the highlights of the report are as follows:

1. The proposed model calls for independent paralegals to be licensed by the Law Society and recommends that paralegal regulation should mirror the existing regulation of lawyers wherever possible, to avoid confusion and duplication.
2. Paralegals scope of practice would be limited to existing practice as defined in legislation and case law and include the following:
   • Small Claims Court: all matters in Small Claims Court, including being recognized by the Court for the purposes of costs.
   • The Ontario Court of Justice: all matters under the Provincial Offences Act.
   • Tribunals: all matters before provincial boards, agencies and tribunals that allow for appearance by agents.
   • Ontario Court of Justice: appeals under the Provincial Offences Act. Currently, section 109 of the Provincial Offences Act authorizes agents to appear on appeals.
3. All applicants for a paralegal license must,
   • Be of good character;
   • Successfully complete an educational programme approved by the Law society; and
   • Pass a licensing examination set by the Law Society.
4. Paralegals would be required to adhere to a code of conduct, carry insurance and contribute to a compensation fund.
5. A process for receiving and investigating consumer complaints would be developed to mirror the system already in place for lawyers. Paralegals found to have engaged in misconduct would be subject to the same type of penalties lawyers face, including the possible loss of their license.
6. Paralegals would elect representatives from amongst themselves to sit on a Standing Committee on Paralegal Regulation and have seats on the Law Society’s governing body, giving them a formal role in the regulation of all legal service providers.
7. The proposed model contains “grandparenting” provisions (see recommendation Nine in the report.)

The Professional Paralegal Association of Ontario (PPAO) refused to meet with the Law Society and hired Frederick H. Zemans to write a position paper on their behalf, arguing against regulation by the Law Society and for paralegals being permitted to do “all” solicitor’s work. They requested a meeting with Attorney General Michael Bryant to plead their case and reportedly were refused and reminded that it was the AG’s decision to have the Law Society as Regulator.

PPAO has subsequently hired a public relations firm and lobbyists to conduct an aggressive campaign. It is understood that they will take the position that “delay is winning”. If they can delay regulation getting on the government’s agenda now, there is a good chance that it will “fall by the wayside”.

To provide consumer protection and to address federal/provincial issues concerning paralegals appearing as agents in defense of summary conviction matters under the Criminal Code and those working on Immigration and Refugee matters, the Law Society has recommended that the licensing requirement should apply to persons working in the area of federal jurisdiction. However, the Law Society is mindful of its constitutional limitations and intends to undertake further work in this area.

At the meeting OBA’s concern about funding the cost of regulation and enforcement was discussed. Bencher James Caskey reported that every opportunity was being taken to re-enforce with the government, the condition that the government must fund the regulation and enforcement of paralegals until a self-funding system could be established.

The Law Society hopes a Bill to implement the recommendations will be introduced by December and is working on a strategy for government and media relations.

It was the consensus of LOG that they support the proposed regulation to get a system in place and later deal with other areas of concern regarding paralegals.

Proposed Resolution:

That the Ontario Bar Association (OBA) congratulate the Law Society of Upper Canada on approving the report of the Task Force on Paralegal Regulation and advise the Law Society that OBA looks forward to working with the Law Society and LOG towards the enactment of appropriate legislation subject to recommendations set forth in Council’s resolution of June 18, 2004.

Posted: 8/31/2004

Early in the year, the government asked the LSUC to consider regulating paralegals and following Convocation’s agreement in principle, a Bencher Working Group was appointed to work with the Ministry of the Attorney General to develop a detailed proposal. The Bencher Working Group committed to keep the Paralegals Working Group, of which OBA is a member, apprised of Bencher Working Group discussions and decisions.

OBA’s Task Force on Paralegals participated in a “consultation group” meeting with representatives from other professional legal associations, to review The Law Society of Upper Canada’s consultation paper “Regulating Paralegals: A Proposed Approach” prior to its official release on May 13, 2004. OBA Task Force Chair, Steve Rosenhek and OBA President Jonathan Speigel promptly responded to the document with a news release and a blast e-mail to all members following the document’s release.

OBA’s Task Force on Paralegals analyzed the report for council and obtained Council’s approval for a resolution in June 2004. The resolution is below:

PARALEGAL Resolution

Resolved that Council ratify the Law Society of Upper Canada’s Consultation Paper re: Paralegal Regulation subject to the following recommendations:

1. That there be enacted an appropriate definition of the “practice of law” consistent with the Paper’s recommendations regarding the permitted activities of paralegals, so as to ensure that there can be effective regulation and enforcement of the scope of paralegal activity; and
2. That the Government of Ontario commit itself to providing the necessary funding to ensure the effective operation and enforcement of the regulatory framework, until such time as an effective funding mechanism is available;
3. That the Ministry of Training Colleges and Universities commit itself to developing, in consultation with the profession, an appropriate “mentoring and practical work experience program” for Paralegal students;
4. That the recommendation concerning paralegals working in Small Claims Court be amended as follows:
   “Small Claims Court: an accredited paralegal would be authorized, subject to existing legislation, to handle all matters in Small Claims Court and be recognized by the COURT for the purposes of costs.”

For archived information on the Paralegal issue please click here.