• FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
  • FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
  • FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education

Latest News Articles

Gilbert’s LLP v David Dixon Inc., 2017 ONSC 1345 (CanLII)

[6]               This case raises an important procedural issue respecting the avenues of recourse that are available to a lawyer for the purpose of pursuing a client for payment of his/her fees.  It involves a consideration of the Solicitors Act, and its various provisions that purport to address this issue.  As I will explain below, the issue arises from the outdated and impractical processes contemplated by the Solicitors Act for the collection of legal accounts, which have been compounded by the failure of the Ministry of the Attorney General to properly resource the assessment process, that is provided for in the Solicitors Act.  The problem is further compounded by the confusing and problematic language used in the Solicitors Act, that renders any coherent understanding of the objectives of that statute virtually impossible.  On that latter point, I note the following statement from the covering letter of the Ontario Law Reform Commission that enclosed its 1973 Report on the Solicitors Act.  The Commission said:

The Solicitors Act is based on English legislation and practice which in some respects is no longer suitable to the needs of current Ontario practice.  In many instances, the language used in the present statute is archaic and obscure, and has caused difficulty in interpretation.

Comments are closed.