BarTalk December 2002
Volume 14, Number 6

BarTalk Vol. 14/No. 5 “A Time of Challenge”

This letter, originally sent to David Paul, BC Branch President, is reprinted with the permission of Mr. Allan Williams, QC.

Dear Sir:

I have just read the October issue of BarTalk and your column, “A Time of Challenge.”

Frankly, I don’t understand why the issues in the Wirick Case give rise to the urgent challenge that is troubling you.

It has always been my understanding that the members of the legal profession, in recognition of the special privileges and the right of self-governance we enjoy, have accepted the responsibility of protecting and compensating those clients and innocent parties who suffer loss or damage by reason of the defalcation of our members. Therefore, whether the circumstances are as complex as they seem to be in the Wirick Case or otherwise, it is the obligation of the profession to hold harmless the innocent victim of the events. That being the case, then why all the discussion about insurance schemes or funding. The profession must step up and pay the price.

If the media coverage is the source of your concern, the solution rests with the officials in the Law Society who raise such matters as “innocent party insurance”. That is an internal matter for the profession and of no consequence to the media. How we fund our obligation is only a digression from the clear and simple statement of our obligation. That is what we must repeat as often as necessary. Most assuredly the Law Society officials must not publish solutions that suggest that lawyers will impose a special charge on their clients to meet the cost. Such action is unlawful and a negation of the obligation of our membership. So long as the Law Society allows such propositions to be published our membership can expect to be criticized, our basic position to be misunderstood and the media to attack us.

If a method of raising the money is the issue, I suggest that we be prepared to accept a special assessment. The media cannot confuse that proposition and our members will be reminded of our obligation.

Yours truly,
Allan Williams, QC

The Lawyer Referral Service

This letter is reprinted with the permission of Mr. David Roberts, QC.

I shall be retiring from the practice of law on 31 December 2002. That being so, I would appreciate it if you would take my name off the lawyer referral list.

I have appreciated, over the many years that I have been on your list, the referrals I have received. Some people I have been able to help, others I have not (largely because their cases were not meritorious or they were amongst the number of social misfits that we all have to endure politely and compassionately). One referral I had was a case that ended up in the Supreme Court of Canada [Editor’s note: Kane v. Board of Governors of UBC]. It is cited as authority in administrative law constantly.

I wish to end by saying that in my opinion the Lawyer Referral Service is one of the outstanding services for the public that the Canadian Bar Association administers.

Yours faithfully,
David Roberts, QC

These letters were published in the December 2002 issue of BarTalk.