Law Times

March 17, 2014

The premier weekly newspaper for the legal profession in Ontario

Issue link: http://digital.lawtimesnews.com/i/277690

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 0 of 15

Visit carswell.com or call 1.800.387.5164 for a 30-day no-risk evaluation )BSECPVOEȕ1VCMJTIFE'FCSVBSZFBDIZFBS 0OTVCTDSJQUJPOȕ- 0OFUJNFQVSDIBTFȕ- .VMUJQMFDPQZEJTDPVOUTBWBJMBCMF 1SJDFTTVCKFDUUPDIBOHFXJUIPVUOPUJDF]UPBQQMJDBCMFUBYFTBOETIJQQJOHIBOEMJOH CANADIAN LAW LIST 2014 :063*/45"/5$0//&$5*0/50$"/"%"Ȏ4-&("-/&5803, ȕ BOVQUPEBUFBMQIBCFUJDBMMJTUJOH ȕ DPOUBDUJOGPSNBUJPO ȕ MFHBMBOEHPWFSONFOUDPOUBDUJOGPSNBUJPO .03&5)"/"1)0/�, CLL-Dir_LT_Feb10_14.indd 1 14-01-31 12:11 PM Crackdown on placeholder motions Measure among changes credited with cutting delays uperior Court Chief Justice Heather Smith says her goal of reducing long wait times for civil motions to four months "has been largely met" in Toronto. Six months a er Smith told Law Times her of- fi ce was working to reduce delays for civil motions, law- yers are reporting some improvement for short motions. But they say it still takes too long to book long motions and trials. In a statement to Law Times, Smith said the review ef- forts initiated in September 2013 and guided by Regional Senior Justice Geoff rey Morawetz divided the work into two phases. " e fi rst phase focused on reducing the wai t times for civil long motions in Toronto. e goal of Phase I was to reduce the extended 'times out' to civil long motions in Toronto down to less than four months by the end of 2013. at goal has been more than met — by the end of December 2013, the wait time for a long motion had been signifi cantly reduced to considerably less than four months," said Smith. e outcomes, Smith added, are a result of new sched- uling practices introduced in the Toronto region. at involved increasing the scheduling capacity by 66 per cent as of November 2013 through adjusting judicial re- sources and scheduling practices. "In November 2013, a new practice direction was im- plemented to eliminate 'placeholder' motions and appli- cations," she added, noting the courts now require a party Deal reached on contracting court transcription work he Ontario Public Service Employees Union and the Ministry of the Attorney General have reached a settlement in a long-running dispute about the con- tracting out of court transcription work. e settlement allows the ministry to move forward on its new model for the preparation and certifi cation of court transcripts. Starting in June, salaried court reporters will record proceedings but independent court transcriptionists will do the transcription phase of the work. rough the transition, the province has of- fered existing court reporters the option of taking the in-court record and not producing the tran- scripts; doing the in-court work and performing transcription duties as independent contractors; or becoming completely independent and doing the transcript work only. " e ministry and the union are currently working together to implement the settle- ment," said ministry spokesman Brendan Crawley last week. " e transcriptionists will be selected from a publicly accessible list and parties will place the transcript order directly with the authorized transcriptionist," Crawley added. " e authorized court transcription- ist and the ordering party will agree to all aspects of production, including availability to prepare transcripts within required timelines, pay- ment options, and any specifi c delivery require- ments." Besides the contracting as- pect, the parties also came to an agreement on a related pay dispute involving the ministry's court reporters. In a case going back years, OPSEU accused the province of being in violation of its collective agreement by not applying it to court reporters who prepare and certify transcripts. At one point, the union took the matter to the Grievance Settlement Board as it sought an order applying the terms and condi- tions of the collective agreement. e board found the duties court report- ers perform in typing and cer- tifying transcripts of court proceedings was bargaining-unit work rather than additional freelance-type duties beyond their regular courtroom activities. But the dispute con- tinued as the union SUMMARY JUDGMENT Does discoverability require a trial? P4 CRIMINAL JUSTICE Putting current approach into historical perspective P7 FOCUS ON Restructuring & Insolvency P9 'They've instituted changes that are not designed to shorten the time period for having a motion heard; they're designed to discourage people from bringing motions,' says Daniel Reisler. Photo: Laura Pedersen See OPSEU, page 4 See Long, page 4 transcript order directly with the authorized transcriptionist," Crawley added. " e authorized court transcription- ist and the ordering party will agree to all aspects of production, including availability to prepare transcripts within required timelines, pay- ment options, and any specifi c delivery require- Grievance Settlement Board as it sought an order applying the terms and condi- tions of the collective agreement. e board found the duties court report- ers perform in typing and cer- A new deal will provide for the contracting out of court transcription work. PM #40762529 SUMMARY JUDGMENT Does discoverability require a trial? & $#&!&jmmm$cYa[bbWh$Yec ntitled-4 1 12-03-20 10:44 AM l aw TIMes $4.00 • Vol. 25, No. 10 March 17, 2014 Follow LAW TIMES on www.twitter.com/lawtimes l aw TIMes l aw TIMes BY YAMRI TADDESE Law Times S BY YAMRI TADDESE Law Times T Shutterstock: Lisa F. Young

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Law Times - March 17, 2014