Law Times

PAGE 6 COMMENT Law Times Group Publisher ....... Karen Lorimer Editorial Director ....... Gail J. Cohen Editor .................. Glenn Kauth Staff Writer ............. Robert Todd Staff Writer ....... Michael McKiernan Copy Editor ......... Heather Gardiner CaseLaw Editor ...... Jennifer Wright Art Director .......... Alicia Adamson Account Co-ordinator ...... Ryan Rogers Electronic Production Specialist ............. Derek Welford Advertising Sales .... Kimberlee Pascoe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Kathy Liotta Sales Co-ordinator ......... Sandy Shutt ©Law Times Inc. 2010 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reprinted or stored in a retrieval system without written permission. The opinions expressed in articles are not necessarily those of the publisher. Information presented is compiled from sources believed to be accurate, however, the publisher assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions. Law Times Inc. disclaims any warranty as to the accuracy, completeness or currency of the contents of this publication and disclaims all liability in respect of the results of any action taken or not taken in reliance upon information in this publication. Editorial Obiter Jennifer Stoddart gets tough as term nears end I n another reminder of the slip- pery slope of privacy rights in the age of social media, Privacy Com- missioner Jennifer Stoddart came out swinging last week against Google Inc. Along with her counterparts from nine other countries, Stoddart released a letter urging the Internet search gi- ant to do more to uphold privacy principles. In particular, she and the other privacy watchdogs took the company to task over the recent launch of its Google Buzz social networking service. Concerns centred on the fact the new Buzz product automatically connected people to their Gmail contacts rather than having them do so themselves. Google has since responded to those complaints by allowing its users to es- tablish privacy controls, but Stoddart remains concerned nevertheless. "We were disturbed by your recent rollout of the Google Buzz social net- working application, which betrayed a disappointing disregard for funda- mental privacy norms and laws," the letter to Google stated. "Moreover, this was not the first time you have failed to take adequate account of pri- vacy considerations when launching new services." The problems, the watchdogs not- ed, should have been "readily appar- ent" to the company. It's tempting to conclude the con- cerns are somewhat of an exaggeration. After all, the company has made changes in response to the problems. At the same time, there's no evidence of any serious consequences as a result of the Buzz application. So are we cre- ating a problem that doesn't exist? Not really. As Stoddart and her col- leagues made clear, the issue goes well beyond Google. As social networking becomes more ubiquitous, Stoddart, a lawyer, has made it one of her pri- orities to educate Canadians about the need to protect their privacy online. In the meantime, as you'll discover on page 13 of this week's Law Times, Stoddart has also suggested it might be time to reform Canada's privacy laws to better align them with techno- logical change. Stoddart's comments are fitting for someone nearing the end of her seven- year term as privacy commissioner. During her time in the role, she has had to balance her dual functions as both regulator and educator. While a few critics have said she hasn't been ag- gressive enough in cracking down on companies that violate the rules, last week's letter involving Google showed Stoddart will get tough when she needs to be while continuing to inform the public. In the meantime, she's risen to international prominence for her willingness to take companies to task. Let's hope whoever succeeds her con- tinues to build on the good work she's been doing. — Glenn Kauth eff Gray of The Globe and Mail recently reported that ex-premier Bill Davis is go- ing to practise law at the fam- ily firm, Davis Webb LLP of Brampton, Ont. Davis would get bored if he put his feet up, he said. He's only 80, after all. Is Davis leading a trend? Will senior lawyers stay in practice for- ever while younger practitioners pine away for lack of opportu- nity? Gray quotes a few youthful doomsayers who fear it's true. I doubt it. The situation for J young lawyers is probably as good today as it's ever been. There was a time when se- niority used to hold nearly absolute sway in law firm hi- erarchies. "You may be more valuable, but I am older," a senior partner at Blake Cas- sels & Graydon LLP told Al- lan Graydon when he sought a larger partnership share in the 1930s. Memoirs of the mid-20th century at many law firms spin lurid tales of elderly, unproductive, and alcoholic senior partners controlling the files while appropriating most Older lawyers hanging on but still leave room for youth That's of the profits and making all of the decisions. Look at who used to lead the biggest law firms. Fifty years ago, the handful of part- ners who owned those firms tended to stay on forever. Beverley Matthews was just beginning to hand over power at McCarthys in 1980 when he was 75. At Osler Hoskin & Har- court LLP, his contemporary Hal Mockridge stayed just as long at the firm. In 1990, Fraser Elliott was hitting 70 when he began to step back from lead- ership at Stikeman Elliott LLP. Those guys wielded real power over client relationships and al- locations at their firms. Compare the leaders in the same firms today. After two terms as CEO of McCa- rthy Tétrault LLP, Iain Scott recently stepped down in his mid-50s and made way for the even younger Marc-André Blanchard to take the helm. Chairs and managing partners at other firms are of the same generation. There are fewer greybeards leading major firms History By Christopher Moore now, and leadership tenures are generally shorter, too. What killed the rule of se- niority was competition. As the market for legal services heated up in the latter part of the 20th century, the absolute rule of el- derly lawyer-proprietors became something law firms could no longer afford. It's been the same story at the Law Society of Upper Canada. The average age of benchers was once in the high 60s, and trea- surers used to be elected in their 80s. It's true that the incum- bency advantage still enables elected benchers to stay quite a while, but their average age has dropped sharply in recent decades. Now they're talking about term limits, too. There's no doubt that the of lawyers boomer cohort www.lawtimesnews.com is creating a bulge in the senior ranks these days; it's the same in every nearly field. Still, it's worth remembering that the now-dominant boomers faced at least as grim a situation when they were starting out. The enlarged and more diverse graduating classes of new lawyers in the 1970s hardly found the path to the top open to them. Legal scholar Robert Abel described the situation in 1986 as "a very small cohort of elderly white men [governing] a very large younger cohort with significant female and mi- nority membership." That gen- erational conflict was stormier than the one looming today. The boomers did have good fortune in one respect. Their ca- reers matured in a period when Canadian law firms, once very closely controlled, began to ad- mit associates very rapidly into partnership. In recent decades, a one-to-one ratio of associates to partners has become common in Canadian law firms. Promotion to partnership became an expec- tation after five to seven years. April 26, 2010 • lAw Times Law Times Inc. 240 Edward Street, Aurora, ON • L4G 3S9 Tel: 905-841-6481 • Fax: 905-727-0017 www.lawtimesnews.com President: Stuart J. Morrison Publications Mail Agreement Number 40762529 • ISSN 0847-5083 Law Times is published 40 times a year by Law Times Inc. 240 Edward St., Aurora, Ont. L4G 3S9 • 905-841-6481. lawtimes@clbmedia.ca CIRCULATIONS & SUBSCRIPTIONS $141.75 per year in Canada (GST incl., GST Reg. #R121351134) and US$266.25 for foreign addresses. Single copies are $3.55 Circulation inquiries, postal returns and address changes should include a copy of the mailing label(s) and should be sent to Law Times Inc. 240 Edward St., Aurora, Ont. L4G 3S9. Return postage guaranteed. Contact Kristen Schulz-Lacey at: kschulz-lacey@clbmedia.ca or Tel: 905-713-4355 • Toll free: 1-888-743-3551 or Fax: 905-841-4357. ADVERTISING Advertising inquiries and materials should be directed to Sales, Law Times, 240 Edward St., Aurora, Ont. L4G 3S9 or call Karen Lorimer at 905-713-4339 klorimer@clbmedia.ca, Kimberlee Pascoe at 905-713-4342 kpascoe@clbmedia. ca, or Kathy Liotta at 905-713-4340 kliotta@ clbmedia.ca or Sandy Shutt at 905-713-4337 sshutt@clbmedia.ca Law Times is printed on newsprint containing 25-30 per cent post-consumer recycled materials. Please recycle this newspaper. That ratio is about to be an- other casualty of competition. American and European global law firms, the competitors of the big Canadian firms, often have four associates to every partner. In some cases, they are leaner and more efficient as a result, and I believe Canadian firms are sure to imitate them. It's not because of a few Bill Davises hanging on into their 80s that the current crop of associates will have to fight for corner offices; it's the changed na- ture of the legal market. Law is still a profession where experience counts for something, of course. I know of at least two 1950 calls — and that's after war- time military service — who still show up at their respective offices pretty regularly. But they're not running the firms or keeping files away from ambitious associates. Davis won't be either. LT Christopher Moore's newest book, The British Columbia Court of Appeal: The First Hundred Years, is published this month. His web site is www.christopher moore.ca.

• Cover
• Judicial Supervision
• Aging Lawyers
• Focus On IT/Telecommunications