Law Times

Sept 16, 2013

The premier weekly newspaper for the legal profession in Ontario

Issue link:

Contents of this Issue


Page 0 of 19

SUCCESSION LAWS BACK TO THE FUTURE Lawyer returns to old firm to launch Ottawa office Follow LAW TIMES on $4.00 • Vol. 24, No. 29 P4 Canada has long history of disadvantaging women FOCUS ON P6 L aw TIMes Competition Law NO COST STORAGE Ask Us How. CO V E R I N G O N TA R I O ' S L E G A L S C E N E • W W W. L AW T I M E S N E W S . CO M ntitled-2 1 P8 e: September 16, 2013 13-05-22 10:16 A Lawyers frustrated as motion delays hit 7 months Chief justice acknowledges problems, says review underway BY YAMRI TADDESE Law Times A s Toronto civil litigators grow increasingly frustrated with delays of up to seven months to have simple motions heard, Superior Court Chief Justice Heather Smith says she and her colleagues are working to address the issue. Acknowledging there are "real delays" with scheduling long motions in Toronto, Smith said she and regional senior Justice Edward Then "have already begun to review scheduling efficiencies and how the court's judicial resources can be maximized." Then has asked Superior Court Justice Geoffrey Morawetz to lead a motions effort to identify ways of maximizing both facilities and judicial resources for a more efficient system, Smith said, noting the review will also consider the issue of better case management. The comments follow growing concerns by lawyers working in the civil justice system in Toronto. Chet Wydrzynski, a partner at Reisler Franklin LLP, is airing his frustrations after learning he'll have to wait seven months to bring a motion in a case involving more than 20 parties. "We've been struggling to get major steps in the litigation achieved and we've been trying to get to case management, which is supposed to help with these types of cases and make things smoother. And in order to do that, I have to wait seven months just to get to the court," he says. A lack of judges and courtrooms and a lacklustre See AG, page 5 John McLeish says he books matters outside of Toronto whenever he can in order to avoid delays. Photo: Laura Pedersen BY YAMRI TADDESE Law Times A s the Peel Law Association decides it won't seek leave to appeal from the Supreme Court of Canada following a racial discrimination ruling against it, lawyers on both sides of the matter agree on one thing: early resolution is better than prolonged litigation in cases like Peel Law Association v. Pieters. "Coming out of the decision in the Court of Appeal, I think my tip for anyone eager to defend a human rights case is don't do it. You're better off . . . finding an early resolution," said Mark Freiman, counsel for the Peel Law Association, during a panel discussion on the case hosted by the Canadian Bar Association last week. "And that's a hard thing for me to say because as despicable as racism is, as unacceptable as it is to be treated differently on account of race or on account of gender, on account of the other prohibited grounds in the Ontario Human Rights Code or the Canadian Human Rights Act, it is equally reprehensible to be called a racist." Advising someone to resolve a case despite the implications, including accepting a racist label, is a difficult part of that equation, said Freiman, who noted that invoking multiple levels of appeal "is just too expensive." Lawyers Selwyn Pieters and Brian Noble took their racial discrimination case to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario and later to court after the black lawyers and their articling student were asked to show their identification at the lawyers' lounge at the Brampton, Ont., See I simply, page 5 PM #40762529 Is racism defence futile in wake of Pieters? Geri Sanson, left, and Selwyn Pieters spoke about Peel Law Association v. Pieters at an event last week. Photo: Yamri Taddese Get more online • Fresh Canadian legal news and analysis every day Canadian Lawyer | Law Times | 4Students | InHouse | Legal Feeds Visit Us Online 1-8-5X.indd 1 2/28/11 2:37:34 PM

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Law Times - Sept 16, 2013