Law Times

November 7, 2011

The premier weekly newspaper for the legal profession in Ontario

Issue link: http://digital.lawtimesnews.com/i/54020

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 0 of 19

Litigation Support Our cost effective service scans and indexes your documents into a quickly searchable database. Call us today, we can help! TF: 1.888.781.9083 www.docudavit.com ntitled-2 1 $4.00 • Vol. 22, No. 35 7/7/11 9:10:05 AM Inside This Issue 2 Justicia Extended 6 Texting Dangers 9 Focus On Family Law Quote of the week "It is commonly accepted that an interest in a family trust is excluded and has no value in family law." — Shane Kelford, Howard Ryan Kelford Knott & Dixon, See Lawyers, Page 11 Covering Ontario's Legal Scene titled-10 1 November 7, 2011 11-08-31 2:53 P LSUC treasurer gets $67K boost Next year's honorarium will approach premier's pay BY KENDYL SEBESTA Law Times to the treasurer's honorarium. "Just to be perfectly clear, this is the first major increase since 1993 in the treasurer's honorarium apart from inflation," says former LSUC treasurer Derry Millar, who served from 2008 to 2010. "That's quite a significant point given that the treasurer received no honorarium prior to 1983 and it only increased later to account for infla- tion." Millar authored a report recommending D the current increase to the LSUC's finance committee late last month. In the report, he argued an LSUC treasurer's increased working hours, the honorarium amounts paid to the heads of other law societies and legal organizations, and the need to cre- ate opportunities for small-firm and sole practitioners are all significant factors to consider in determining the proper remu- neration. "My concern is simply this," says Mil- lar. "Given the time required to do the job properly, unless the honorarium is in- creased to a more reasonable rate, the posi- tion of treasurer will be filled only by bench- ers from large firms who can afford to assist the treasurer or the position will be filled by a person who is independently wealthy. In either case, the individual will probably be from Toronto." espite uncertain economic times, the Law Society of Upper Canada has approved a $67,000 increase time to time." An honorarium is generally some level of compensation for the trea- surer's work. The term is contested within the LSUC, however, with some benchers saying the term should instead be salary. "I wonder at the end of the day, since I don't see it very far in the future, that we start to appreciate that it's a full-time job," said Bencher Julian Falconer. "It's clearly compensation," he added. According to the law society, the dis- Former treasurer Derry Millar worries that with- out a hike in the honorarium, benchers who are sole practitioners or work at small firms won't take the job. Benchers approved an increase in the treasurer's honorarium to $175,000 from $108,000 at Convocation last month. The increase will take effect in June 2012 during the next treasurer's term. According to LSUC bylaws, the treasurer is "entitled to receive an honorarium from tinction between the two terms is im- portant, particularly in determining what type of compensation and just how much the treasurer should receive given that it's largely a volunteer position. "The treasurer's honorarium is intended to enable the treasurer to devote more pro- fessional time to law society work by com- pensating, in part, the treasurer for time spent in service to the profession," said law society CEO Malcolm Heins. "The hono- rarium is also a way to increase the likeli- hood that benchers who are sole practitio- ners or members of small firms are able to run for treasurer. The increased honorari- um achieves these goals, while recognizing the volunteer nature of the position. The honorarium has never been considered as a salary or billings replacement." Yet not everyone agrees with this logic. "I don't think it's correct to state that a lesser honorarium would preclude lawyers from smaller firms or a lawyer in sole practice from serving as a treasurer if Convocation so See LSUC, page 4 Court upholds human rights tribunal's powers E BY KENDYL SEBESTA Law Times ven as the Supreme Court curtailed the powers of the federal human rights body Richard Warman launched the original complaint against Terry Tremaine in 2004. last month, the Federal Court of Appeal has gone in a different di- rection in ruling that Canadian Human Rights Tribunal orders carry similar weight to court or- ders and can lead to contempt findings on their own. "It is now settled law that de- cisions of lower tribunals can be enforced on their own account through contempt proceedings because they, like decisions of the superior courts, are considered by the legislator to be deserving of the respect which the contempt powers are intended to impose," Federal Court of Appeal Justice Marc Noël wrote in Canadian Human Rights Commission and Richard Warman v. Terry Tremaine on Oct. 26. "This is what Section 57 achieves with respect to orders made by the tribunal under sec- tions 53 and 54 of the act." Section 57 of the Canadian Hu- man Rights Act states that an order of a tribunal can be enforced if usu- al practices and procedures are fol- lowed or if the commission files a copy with the registry of the court. The case dealt with Tremaine's violations of the tribunal's order against him. It stemmed from Warman's complaints about what the tribunal found to be hateful online postings, which his support- ers insist he has the right to express. "Mr. Tremaine has really been victimized here," says Paul Fromm, the director of the Cana- dian Association for Free Expres- sion who assisted Tremaine with his case. "He's essentially being gagged politically for posting his views and being batted around the system. It's mind-boggling what's being done to this man." Tremaine, who worked at the University of Saskatchewan as a math lecturer until April 2005, be- came the subject of a lengthy inqui- ry by the Canadian Human Rights Commission after Warman filed his complaint in October 2004. In his complaint, Warman al- leged Tremaine had posted "dis- criminatory remarks" to "white su- premacist" and "neo-Nazi" group web sites under the pseudonym See Court, page 4 ADR Connect: Find an ADR Professional 416-487-4447 • admin@adrontario.ca Untitled-2 1 Mediators Arbitrators www.adrontario.ca/findapro.cfm Gold Standard www.lawtimesnews.com 5/20/11 1:11:30 PM

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Law Times - November 7, 2011
loading...
Law Times

To access your digital edition please enter your email address as both your username and password. Not a subscriber? Please call 1-800-387-5164 and subscribe today. Login failed? Please contact aaron.green@tr.com.

 or  free preview Remember me