Law Times

Page 2 January 19, 2015 • Law Times www.lawtimesnews.com NEWS Judge calls out lawyers for lowballing trial estimates By yamri Taddese Law Times he Ontario Court of Justice says it's taking steps to better assess estimates of trial times after a judge in Halton region lamented "a chronic problem" of counsel lowballing the time it would take to complete a matter. In obiter comments at the end of two separate rulings, On- tario Court Justice Lesley Bald- win said trials were running for much longer than counsel esti- mated they would, resulting in delayed justice for litigants. In R. v. Smith, Baldwin took issue with a trial scheduled for one day that ended up taking five days. "Four witnesses were noted for the Crown; one possi- ble witness for the defence. The matter was set for one day. This case took five days of trial time. Nine witnesses were called. Three Charter applications were filed. Written and verbal sub- missions were received through- out this long trial, which started April 16, 2013 and finished to- day, November 6, 2014. "This is yet another case of counsel seriously underestimat- ing the time their trial will take from start to finish. This has become a chronic problem in Halton Region that has resulted in reserved judgments being delivered months after the evi- dence in a trial has ended due to the continuing pile-up of re- served judgments." In another matter decided around the same time, Baldwin reiterated her concern. "Counsel estimated 2.5 days of trial time to complete the matter. This is an- other seriously underestimated trial that has led to reserved judg- ments being delivered with delay here in Halton Region. Justice is not well served when it is delayed," she wrote in R. v. Ivashinnikov. Jane Warwick, communi- cations officer for the Ontario Court of Justice, says the court is aware of the issue. "Steps are being implemented in several court locations in the central west region to better assess hearing time estimates given by both Crown and defence coun- sel through a focused judicial pretrial regime," said Warwick. "Alternative scheduling prac- tices are also being considered. Bench and bar meetings are oc- curring to discuss the options." Criminal lawyer Todd White says it's tough to estimate the time it will take to see a trial from start to finish. "It is very, very difficult to es- timate how long a trial would go simply because of the volume of evidence that is now presented in most criminal trials. It's no longer simply calling the main witnesses. The Crown now calls expert evidence and forensic evidence and cellphone records and cell tower records and vid- eos. There's a much greater vol- ume of disclosure that defence counsel gets," he says. "It's very difficult to estimate how long it will take for the evi- dence to be presented and very difficult to estimate how long the examinations and cross-ex- aminations will take." It's not a new issue but it has become more important given the backlog in the court system, says White. "If you're setting a trial date now in any provincial court in Ontario, you're prob- ably looking at the first six to nine months down the road for the first available date and that gets into unreasonable delay ter- ritory because on top of that, it takes four to six months to get complete disclosure from the police to the defence. "So if the trial estimate is off — say a trial is estimated to take two days and it's not com- pleted in two days — it may be three, four, or six months down the road before you get further dates because of the backlog of the justice system." When it comes to predicting trial times, it's better to over- estimate slightly, says White, who notes greater discussion between counsel as to what to expect during the proceedings would help as well. "Most times, a Crown attor- ney will set a date for trial with- out having viewed the entire file, without having made decisions as to exactly how many witnesses they're going to call," says White. Even in minor criminal mat- ters, there may be five of six po- lice officers involved, according to White, who suggests counsel should take a more in-depth look at the evidence and decide what evidence and which wit- nesses they'll call prior to setting a trial date. The volume of disclosure has expanded in the last five years with the increasing number of devices police can search, he points out. "It used to be that you'd get a case and it was the size of a binder. Now, every case I have is a banker's box, at least, because they're getting phone records, they're getting videos, they're getting notes, they're doing computer searches, computer forensic testing," he says. Criminal lawyer David Bayl- iss says the issue is less of a con- cern in the Superior Court of Justice where he says lawyers are "pretty good" at estimating how long it takes to see a trial from start to finish. "For any case that's gone over, you can find a case where counsel have done it in less time," he says. "It's a different kind of problem at the Ontario Court of Justice," he adds. "You're talking about shorter matters and it's always dif- ficult to estimate how long cross- examinations will take. It's heavily dependent on how the witnesses answer the questions." Counsel are trying to be ef- ficient when they estimate trial times, according to Bayliss, who notes he doesn't know of a single lawyer who would intentionally lowball their prediction. When time estimates are wrong, it hurts lawyers as much as anybody else, Bayliss notes. "It's very difficult for a lawyer in the Ontario Court of Justice if a time turns out to be wrong. . . . Then the lawyer has to pre- pare for a second day, so it's very time-consuming and prepara- tion intensive." Unforeseen events during trials are just "the nature of the beast," he adds. "It does some- times happen that cases turn out to be a lot more complex. Issues arise sometimes in the course of a trial that have to be dealt with. But I don't see it as a chronic problem in my experience." Judges also have a role in es- timates for trial times, especially where there has been a judicial pretrial because, says Bayliss, "no estimate is set unless a judge signs off on it." LT New Edition Canadian Criminal Law: A Treatise, 7th Edition Don Stuart, B.A., LL.B., Dipl. in Criminology, D. Phil Now in its seventh edition, Canadian Criminal Law: A Treatise provides important insight into the future direction of the case law and legislative changes. New in this edition The 7th Edition has been thoroughly updated to reflect the significant case law and legislative developments since the publication of the last edition in 2011. This edition analyzes the following major new Supreme Court of Canada decisions: • Bedford: Section 7 of Charter standards of overbreadth, arbitrariness and gross disproportionality; striking down prostitution laws as too harmful to sex workers • Khawaja: Terrorism offence read down to avoid overbreadth challenge • Levkovic: Mens rea for concealing dead child • Maybin: Intervening causes • A.D.H.: Presumption of subjective mens rea for crimes • Mabior: Consent to sexual intercourse with an HIV-positive accused • Cairney and Pappas: Air of reality test for partial defence of provocation to murder • Ryan: Abused wife hiring hitman to kill her husband not able to rely on duress defence • Gauthier: Abandonment as defence to s.21 party liability Legislative changes considered in this edition include Parliament's trend to adding mandatory minimum sentences and Charter decisions striking some down, as well as new, simplified Criminal Code defences of self-defence and of defence of property enacted in 2013. Under the defence of insanity in Chapter 5, consideration is given to the new classification of the American Psychiatric Association (2013), Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). The classic work on Canadian criminal law Available risk-free for 30 days Order online: www.carswell.com Call Toll-Free: 1-800-387-5164 In Toronto: 416-609-3800 Order # 986436-65203 $135 Softcover + CD-ROM approx. 900 pages December 2014 978-0-7798-6436-2 Shipping and handling are extra. Price(s) subject to change without notice and subject to applicable taxes. 00226HM-A46995 T

• Cover