Real Property Lawyers: Are you in need of a mentor? Would you mentor someone if you had the time? Here is a possible solution for both. The Working Group on Lawyers and Real Estate has undertaken a mentoring initiative on their web site, www.lawyersworkinggroup.com. This mentoring initiative is set up so that everyone can participate with little effort. Go to the site, see the question of the month, click on the suggested answers provided or add a comment and you’re done.
The Working Group encourages all Ontario real estate lawyers to visit the web site regularly or sign up for the email notification service and receive the new question when it is posted. The Working Group will collate all the answers and may offer some further comment or reflection.
The survey responses are anonymous so everyone is encouraged to lend their opinion or practice standard. The more lawyers around the province participate, the greater the issues can be canvassed and practical information be provided for all to see. Continue reading
Here you are, but — You see how the word ‘but’ is the harbinger of bad faith, how the grantor never intended to give without taking away or wanting something in return. What flows from the use of the conjunction is a natural source of ambiguity. The use of the exceptionalist style, so pervasive among lawyers, is also poor form because it weakens the product of our work. In the July, 2013, Canadian Lawyer, my column explains how this happens and how we can reduce our addiction to the use of the word. Click on the image to the right, to read further.
~ ~ ~
Je vous le donne, mais — Voyez que le mot ‘mais’ apporte la mauvaise foi dans chaque phrase. Et de l’ambiguité. Cela fait partie d’une style exceptionnaliste qu’aiment tous les avocats dans leur travail. Dans l’article de juillet 2013 dans Canadian Lawyer, je propose une stratégie pour réduire cette faute. Cliquez sur l’image du mot ‘BUT’ pour accéder à l’article.
Apart from the licence to practice law, Canadian lawyers need to carry mandatory errors and omissions insurance. Despite its importance to every private practitioner’s business, the subject attracts little attention until the former client serves the writ. Most have never read their standard policy. The rule making insurance compulsory comes from the legal regulators’ statutory mandates to protect the public against – you guessed it – you! But as an insurance policy, it is written to protect you from claims against you arising from your practice. My paper, Legal Professional Negligence and Insurance, provides some insights in navigating this forbidding topic.
Despite the splash that ‘unbundling’ made as a model for legal service delivery, it has largely been the domain of family law and small claims litigation. As a business model, unbundling presents considerable challenges for the law practice. My recent paper, Drawing Clear Boundaries: Unbundling Litigation Without Letting It All Hang Out, provides some do’s and don’ts of making limited-scope retainers work in a litigation practice.
Is it earned? Or is it an entitlement? We never quite get our mind around the concept of merit, although it is among the most recurring themes in Canadian law, and despite its importance to every lawyer’s career. In this month’s Accidental Mentor column, the writer takes the plunge into the ambiguous meaning of merit. Click on the image to read the article.
Qu’est-ce ça veut dire, que l’on ‘mérite.’ Verbe transitif et non-transitif, et nom masculin terminé d’un ‘e’. En droit canadien, la signification du mérite est soumise à des usages différents à différents points dans une carrière juridique. Malgré son importance pour le bien-être de tous d’avocats et les avocates, très peu entre nous prennent le temps à y penser. Dans l’article du mois dans Accidental Mentor, l’écrivain essaie de creuser dans la sémiologie du mot mérite. Cliquez sur l’image pour accéder à l’article.