Law Times

PAGE 4 Mid-market firms expanding through global networks NEWS cused on serving mid-market clients have been expanding their international reach as well. By way of example, consider Miller Thomson LLP, Can- ada's ninth-largest firm with about 500 lawyers and offices W hile most of the brouhaha surrounding the global expansion of law firms has touted the largest firms along with the biggest clients and the associated transactions, those fo- BY JULIUS MELNITZER For Law Times U.K., we're doing more development work in Italy, and we're looking at north- ern Europe. work, Miller Thomson is also position- ing itself to access high-quality represen- tation abroad. In April, the strategy cul- minated in an affiliation agreement with FIDAL, France' But although the focus is on inbound " in major centres like Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Cal- gary, and Edmonton as well as smaller Ontario cities such as Markham, Waterloo, London, and Guelph. In addition, the firm has locations in Regina and Saskatoon. "We don't necessarily have the same type of client as some other major Canadian firms whose roster includes a significant component of large Canadian companies look- ing abroad, of the firm's executive committee. bound work from the mid-market, medium-sized investor who looks at Canada on its own merits or as a gateway to the U.S." The firm sees no need for foreign locations, even through " says Montreal-based Pierre Paquet, a member "From an international perspective, we target the in- with 1,200 lawyers and 90 offices. But for strictly regional firms seeking s largest business law firm international business or exposure, net- working may be the strategy of choice. Networks appeal to firms that cherish independence and flexibility in their relationships but want a formal asso- ciation that gives them global reach. Networks meet these criteria because they offer a form of territorial exclusivity while leaving members free to pursue pre-existing relationships and new opportunities with non-members. Twelve Canadian firms, for example, have joined what are known as representative offices. "Our strategy has been aimed at establishing a good friends network among law firms in the U.S. and Europe with a special focus on Europe in the last three years," says Paquet. "We also have a client base in the LLP in Toronto; Ottenheimer Baker in Newfoundland and Labrador; Pitblado LLP in Manitoba; Robertson Stromberg LLP in Saskatchewan; and Wickwire Holm in Nova Scotia. "In terms of global presence, I like man of Meritas. "If you're dealing with a global franchise s also a vice chair- where we are compared to international law firms," says André Ryan of Montre- al-based BCF, who' operation, for example, we're better posi- tioned than the international law firms." Ryan adds that the network concept Miller Thomson has been seeking net- works of firms in a bid to garner inter- national business, says Pierre Paquet. September 24, 2012 • Law timeS the world. "The nature of our member firms allows us to offer Meritas, a coalition of 179 regional firms in 76 coun- tries. The Canadian members are BCF in Quebec; Barry Spalding Lawyers in New Brunswick; Boughton Law Corp. in British Columbia; BrazeauSeller LLP in Otta- wa; Harrison Pensa LLP in London; Matheson & Mur- ray in Prince Edward Island; McLennan Ross LLP in Alberta and the Northwest Territories; Minden Gross Challenge predicted Continued from page 1 three-strikes dangerous offender hearing, what evidence do I need to call?' This forces the courts to sit up and take notice of who has to prove what and what' the Charter because it streamlined the process for labelling offend- ers as dangerous and applied only to a small class of individuals. But Bryant remained unconvinced as he found no "pressing need" to streamline the process. "Government statistics concerning dangerous offenders do not indicate an urgent need for streamlining dangerous offender applications," he wrote. "Between 1978 and April 2005, 384 persons were designated as dangerous offenders. The number of per- sons designated as dangerous offenders increased from eight in 1978 to a yearly average of 22 in the years 1995 to 2004." Bryant went on to conclude that "a breach of an individual' Crown lawyers argued that the section should be saved by s. 1 of s reasonable in the context of burden of proof." rights cannot be justified or condoned in a free and democratic society because the class of affected individuals is small. s s. 7 rights under the Charter in relation to the presumption of innocence and cruel and unusual punishment. Bryant sided with the Crown on the s. 11(d) argument, finding that Behr also argued that the provision violated Hill's s. 11(d) and 12 " the presumption of innocence doesn't apply at a sentencing hearing. He declined to consider the s. 12 argument aſter finding the s. 7 breach. In its 2007 submission to Parliament on the Tackling Violent Crime Act, the Canadian Bar Association's national criminal justice section had warned the government to expect a fight on the danger- ous offender changes. "We expect that the reverse onus provisions would attract vigorous constitutional challenge under section 7 of the Charter," the submis- global manufacturing companies very responsive and cost-efficient services," says Ryan. According to Ryan, Meritas' member firms are evolving to a common culture that has allowed them to start compet- ing with major competitors for some mandates. "Working toward a common culture has allowed us to " he says. put together multijurisdictional offers of services that pres- ent opportunities that would not normally be available to regional firms working alone, LT Case conferences touted Continued from page 1 we want to take,'" he says. in a share purchase agreement that Weston claims en- titles it to $110 million. The case stuttered following the closing of pleadings before Weston served its sum- mary judgment record in 2011. Domtar initially con- sented to the scheduling of the motion but changed its position aſter the release of Combined Air. In his decision, Brown found the motion wasn't a Weston sued Domtar back in 2007 over a clause good candidate for summary judgment because of the complexity of the contractual interpretation issues at play, the large amount of money at stake, the intention of both parties to rely on expert witnesses, and disputes over production. Since both sides had already invested in producing a summary judgment record, he ordered the parties to prepare a "modified trial preparation plan" with a view to a "non-conventional" trial in early 2013 based on the record already established and supplemented with elements of traditional discovery. "Under our rules, the 'conventional trial' no lon- ger exists as a norm; the rules have made the civil trial modular in nature, with counsel and the judge able to fashion trials tailor-made to the circumstances of each particular case, sion reads. In addition, the CBA warned that the "presumptive 'third- strike' predicate offence would very likely result in many more cases at all stages going to trial to avoid a conviction. This would be the case for any primary designated offence, whether the offence in question was the offender' and resulting increased demands on resources would be the inevitable result and should be carefully considered. a custodial sentence of two years and six months. Then in 2004, he got two more years for a conviction of assault causing bodily harm aſter serving more than five months in pretrial custody. His 2010 guilty pleas included his third designated offence for crimes that Bryant de- scribed in his judgment as "horrible. Hill was originally convicted in 2000 of sexual assault and received s first, second or third. Delays in court administration " went on to find that Hill should be labelled a dangerous offender us- ing the traditional test and the case returns to court on Oct. 16 for the judge to deliver his sentence. In a statement, Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General spokes- otherwise affected by this ruling," he said. Despite his finding on the constitutionality of s. 753(1.1), Bryant " compared the 2010 amendments to the Rules of Civil Procedures to Lego blocks. "Our court must use these trial building blocks " Brown wrote in a ruling that to offer litigants creative, cost-attractive trial options if we stand any hope of limiting complex summary judgment motions to the role defined for them by the Court of Appeal in the Combined Air decision and preserving the role of the public courts as the primary adjudicators of civil cases." Weston' gation partner at Borden Ladner Gervais LLP, says his client won't be appealing the ruling. "Our client brought the motion for summary judgment because we were interested in having a quick determination of the issues," he says. "Although we were unsuccessful on this motion, the judge has indicated that we will be able to get a relatively quick trial. s lawyer Christopher Bredt, a senior liti- man Brendan Crawley stressed that the ruling applied only to the presumption in s. 753(1.1) of the Criminal Code. "The dangerous offender regime in the Criminal Code is not LT tors to embrace quick trials. He highlighted a "motions culture" in Toronto that sees lawyers "preferring to wait nine months for a hearing date for a complex (i.e. full day) summary judgment motion instead of accepting a trial date three months hence. Employing another unorthodox analogy, Brown said he believes some less experienced counsel are " www.lawtimesnews.com Brown's judgment suggests he wants more litiga- " scared off from trials because of their unfamiliarity with them. He compared the Toronto bench to Dr. Se- uss' Sam-I-Am, who struggles to shiſt another charac- ter' the fact that he has never actually tasted them himself. In his factum, Bredt raised a concern that en- s determined dislike for green eggs and ham despite couraging the striking of motions for summary judgment could create a "cottage industry" around strike motions and turn summary judgment into a two-step procedure. But in his judgment, Brown said his approach would limit discussions on the appropriateness of a summary judgment motion to those that would con- sume significant court time. He sees a case conference as the best place to raise motions to strike so that no formal motions would be brought without leave of the case management judge. In the other case decided by Brown, defendant Sobeys moved for partial summary judgment in an attempt to narrow the issues in its dispute with seven franchisees who ran its Price Chopper grocery stores. Brown questioned whether the summary judg- ment motion would result in any cost savings consid- ering that Sobeys had conceded a trial would still be necessary regardless of its success on the partial sum- mary judgment motion. "To have one judge (the motion judge) review works especially well for multinational manufacturing companies, particularly those that require financing based on the security of local assets and deal with suppliers, leases, and real estate around that history to consider some of the complaints as- serted by the plaintiffs in respect of the long course of contractual dealings between the parties and then to have another judge (the trial judge) review most or all of that history to review other com- plaints would involve an unnecessary and wasteful duplication of judicial effort," wrote Brown. He ordered a trial plan completed by the end of this month that would include the names of all witnesses, a time estimate for the length of the trial, and deadlines for expert reports. He also ordered an appearance by the end of October to set a trial date. Jason Squire, a partner at Lerners LLP, says he has seen Brown take a similar hands-on approach with one of his matters on the commercial list and is inter- ested to see how many judges will follow his lead. "It remains to be seen if it becomes common prac- tice. . . . The commercial list is certainly a more likely place for it to take hold because there' judges taking charge of things. It's not a place where " s a history of you can expect cases to languish. If people expect that he [Brown] and others will maintain discipline like that on cases, I think you can expect Toronto practitio- ners will accommodate it. They'll have to. LT

• Cover