page 1 of 96 council agenda - nsbs...

COUNCIL AGENDA

Date November 25, 2016

Time 12:30 pm

Chair R. Daren Baxter QC, TEP

1. INTRODUCTORY MATTERS

2. CONSENT AGENDA MATTERS Pg

i. Minutes of October 28, 2016 meeting 3

ii. Committee Term of Reference – Succession Planning Task Force 10

iii. Committee appointments: Professional Standards (Real Estate) Committee - Sean Rooney; Succession Planning Working Group – Heidi Foshay-Kimball, Chair, Gerald Green,

Robert Carter, Loretta Manning

iv. Resignations: Ms. Terry Louise Roane QC, Ms. Angele Mina Comeau

v. Amendments to Regulation 3.5, Principals and Supervising Lawyers Memo from J. Mullenger

11

3. EXCELLENCE IN REGULATION AND GOVERNANCE

a) Items for Approval

i. Legal Services Regulation - Request for Legislation Pkg. 3 Council make-up and Law Corporations

21

ii. Amendment to Reg. 4.2.1(a) – Designated Members – D. Pink to address 31

iii. 2017 Annual Firm Report and Trust Account Report – S. Walker to address 34

b) Items for discussion

c) Items for Information

4. IMPROVING THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

a) Items for approval


c) Items for Information

i. Filling the gaps - Refugee workshop aims to train lawyers in immigration law ii. Submission to FLSC Access to Justice inventory iii. Opinion Piece – Access to Justice and Market Failure

45 48 51

of 96

2

5. FOUNDATIONAL ACTIVITIES


i. National Discipline Standards – V. Rees to address 55

b) Items for Information

i. NSBS Consolidated Statements to September 30, 2016ii. Federation and Academy Reconnect on Legal Education

76

81

c) Items for discussion

6. IN CAMERA

7. ITEMS FOR INFORMATION / REPORTS

i. Council Calendar 83

ii. 2016-2017 Activity Plan 85

iii. Executive Director’s Report 94

iv. President’s Report

8. MEETINGS

Friday, January 20, 2017 9:00 am Friday, February 24, 2017 9:00 am Friday, March 24, 2017 9:00 am Friday, April 28, 2017 9:00 am Friday, May 26 , 2017 9:00 am Thursday, June 15 – Friday, June 16, 2017 Council Orientation Saturday, June 17, 2017 Annual Meeting Schulich School of Law

of 96

COUNCIL MINUTES

Date October 28, 2016

Time 9:00 am

Present: R. Daren Baxter QC, TEP, President Julia Cornish QC, First Vice-President Frank Demont QC, Second Vice-President Darrel Pink, Executive Director Mike Baker Natalie Borden John Bodurtha Ellen Burke Sheree Conlon Heidi Foshay-Kimball QC Peggy Gates-Hammond Gavin Giles QC Loretta Manning Jillian MacNeil Diane McGrath QC Kelly Middlestadt Andrew Nickerson QC Alonzo Wright

Regrets: Nancy Barteaux QC Dean Camille Cameron Karen Fitzner Rene Gallant Tuma Young

Staff: Sharon Cox Marla Cranston Jackie Mullenger Patricia Neild Shirley Shane, Recording

Guests: Jill Perry

1. INTRODUCTORY MATTERS

The President extended a welcome to the new member for Central District, Ellen R. Burke, and presented

her Council pin.

Also introduced was Sharon Cox, the Society’s Human Resources Officer.

2. CONSENT AGENDA MATTERS

i. Minutes of September 23, 2016 meetingii. Committee appointments:

Gender Equity Committee: Nasha Nijhawan Racial Equity Committee: Alexander MacKillop Legal Services Regulation In-House and Government Lawyers Working Group, Mark

Everett Professional Standards (Real Estate) Committee Chair, Matthew Moir

iii. Resignations: John L.D. Cook

iv. Amendments to Regulation 3.5, Principals and Supervising Lawyersv. Eligibility to act as principal or supervising lawyer – Jackie Mullenger, Director, Education &

Credentials

of 96

2

vi. Committee Work Plans:

Code of Professional Conduct (CPCC) Racial Equity Gender Equity Governance & Nominating

UPON MOTION by Mike Baker and seconded by Loretta Manning the Consent Agenda matters were approved as presented. Motion passed.

3. EXCELLENCE IN REGULATION AND GOVERNANCE

a) Items for Approval i. Request for Legislation – Pkg. 1 – Purpose of Society & Scope of regulation

Memo from Executive Director Side-by-side of provisions to be amended

Executive Director, Darrel Pink reviewed the requested amendments to the Legal Profession Act that embody the policy framework for Legal Services Regulation adopted by Council on November 20, 2015 and the subsequent discussions at Council in July and September. To avoid the necessity of enacting an entirely new Legal Profession Act, this request adapts Council’s policy framework to a limited set of amendments and maintains the present structure of the Act.

An initiative to transform regulation of the delivery services in Nova Scotia and a commitment by the Society to improve access to legal services to the public followed the adoption of a strategic framework that addressed ‘excellence in regulation and governance’ and ‘improving the administration of justice’. The Society articulated that it must become a regulator committed to expanding the availability of legal services by a variety of means while ensuring that the public is protected from poor quality and incompetent service providers. This will entail expanding what traditional lawyers and law firms can do, creating an opportunity for organizations to provide regulated legal services to the public and creating a new class of limited scope legal service providers or paralegals; however, only those regulated by the Society will be able to practise law. A lengthy question and answer session followed covering matters such as the Society’s process of winding up practices, the role of custodians and the CIC, appeal hearings, provisions for reinstatement, the range of oversight by the Society, insurance, the two types of designation of law firms, setting up new firms vs grandfathering and what information we need to maintain on those delivering legal services. Under Triple-P approach (principled, proportionate, proactive) firms would complete their MSELP (self-assessment) and we would take new firms through the self-assessment process so they are building their law firm with the MSELP requirements in place.

UPON MOTION it was moved by Natalie Borden and seconded by Diane McGrath to approve this portion of the ‘Request for Legislation.’ We anticipate providing this to the Department of Justice by December 1, 2016.

Motion carried.

ii. Request for Legislation – Pkg. 2 – Council and Pt. III (Professional Responsibility) Memo from Executive Director re Elements of Law Firm Regulation

When Council began to explore Entity Regulation and the change in how we regulate, there were two themes that we identified. We wanted to “change the nature of the conversation” with the profession in general, and law firms in particular. The second theme was one that we adopted

of 96

3

from our Australian colleagues when we said that our work must be directed to “educate towards compliance.” Both of these themes have influenced the work that has been done to date. The Executive Director outlined the pieces that need to be in place to meet our purpose of regulating in the public interest and implementing our regulatory objectives.

1. Designation of law firms and collection of key information 2. Development of clear standards 3. Creation of a means for law firms to assess themselves 4. Support for the Practice Standards and self-assessment with robust resources 5. Assist firms to address and improve in areas where their self-assessment identifies that

to be desirable 6. Identify and monitor those areas where compliance with clear rules/regulations is

required and develop an effective means for law firms to report on compliance 7. Address and respond to areas where there is non-compliance using the Triple-P

approach 8. Ensure that the professional responsibility process is equipped to deal with professional

conduct matters involving law firms using a Triple-P approach

He said these components are designed to use a Triple-P and risk-focused approach in our response to all issues affecting law firms. With the success of identifying issues through the MSELP process, our goal is that only the most unusual and rarest of cases will require a true regulatory and disciplinary response.

Memo from ED and PRPPC re Council and Pt. III (Professional Responsibility)

This portion of the request for amendments to the Legal Profession Act has been prepared to address several changes that result from the changes contained in Package 1, to reflect some of the proposals that government has been circulating regarding self-regulating professions and the consultation regarding them, and amendments to Part III regarding the Professional Responsibility process. This latter group deals with a number of small amendments that have been identified over the years, the embodiment of Triple-P to the Professional Responsibility process and those required to ensure there is the requisite authority and tools to deal with law firms.

The Executive Director reviewed the recommended amendments and responded to questions from those present. He stressed that it is preferable to handle this under legislation and not a change to the Legal Profession Act.

The legislation provides clarity re the Executive Director’s authority with intake of complaints as there is currently a gap in the structure to deal with complaints that are clearly without merit but do not fit into any of the basis we have for dismissal.

A lengthy question and answer session followed covering matters such as the Society’s process of winding up practices, the role of custodians and the CIC, appeal hearings, provisions for reinstatement, and the range of oversight by the Society. A discussion occurred on Items under the proposed changes relating to Council: 1. The government has circulated a discussion paper regarding self-regulated professions.

Though it is not yet adopted as policy, it does identify a number of practices that are now widely accepted as elements of good governance. The two most directly connected to us relate the size of the Board of Directors (Council). This allows us to look at the number of public representatives on Council and whether there should be statutory positions any longer.

of 96

4

2. On the later point discussions with the former Deputy AG and the former Dean of the Schulich School of Law allowed for the conclusion that relations between the Society and the Department of Justice and the Schulich School of Law at Dalhousie University are not effectively managed through representation on Council. Rather they require a more specific form of engagement that should be part of the Society’s strategic engagement and communications work.

Daren Baxter QC, TEP suggested that the Executive Director proceed with the recommendations with the exception of the law dean and DoJ on Council which matter will return for Council`s input.

UPON MOTION it was moved by Gavin Giles QC and seconded by Mike Baker that this portion of the ‘Request for Legislation’ be approved.

iii. LIANS Memo from Daren Baxter Petition for special meeting

On behalf of the Executive, the President advised that it is premature to proceed with the proposed merger of LIANS due to factors including: A new director of LIANS is proposed to be hired in the near future who will be responsible

for LIANS’s operations. It would be appropriate allow that person time to become familiar with LIANS and to consult with that person before making any significant changes.

One of the motivations for proposed merger is better alignment with the “principled, proportionate and proactive” approach to regulation adopted by Council. We are only in the initial phases of the integration of the PPP philosophy in the Society’s operations. Once we have more experience and have identified PPP challenges and needs we will be in a better position to determine appropriate alignment with LIANS programs, like the Risk and Practice Management, and trend identification.

Another motivation for the proposed merger is a proactive step to avoid a potential, future administrative liability risk that might be inherent in the LIANS structure. This is identified as a risk only and has not materialized and may never materialize. There are some external factors which first need to be determined in order to better assess the level of risk in the current structure. These factors remain outstanding. And there may be other ways to manage any such administrative risks. We will continue to take professional advice in this regard.

Consultation with the membership by the President, other executive members and some Council members has revealed a strong desire to maintain the legal separation of LIANS, notwithstanding a potential cost increase to the membership.

A letter was received from David Hirtle, President of Lunenburg Bar Association that included a petition requesting a public meeting be held prior to any decision being made with respect to the proposed changes to LIANS.

A discussion took place on the legitimacy of special meetings of Council relating to Section 2.2.3 of the Regulations pursuant to the Legal Profession Act, S.N.S., 2004, Chapter 28.

It was agreed to arrange a special meeting combining personal attendance plus teleconferencing involving Council members who are available. UPON MOTION it was moved by Andy Nickerson QC and seconded by Loretta Manning QC that the Executive Committee proceed with arranging a special meeting.

of 96

5

Motion carried.

iv. Regulation Amendment 3.1 – Definition of ‘law degree’ Memo from E. Cumming and draft regulation amendment

This regulation was amended in July 2014 to give effect to the decision of Council in April of that year. Council had determined that as a matter of public interest policy, it could determine that the Society would not accept a law degree if the institution seeking to grant the degree discriminates in its admission or enrollment requirements. It tied the definition of discrimination to the Human Rights Act of Nova Scotia.

Whereas Trinity Western University (TWU) is seeking to operate a law school and grant law degrees;

And whereas TWU requires its faculty, staff and students to read, understand and pledge to the terms of its Community Covenant that unlawfully discriminates on grounds prohibited by either or both the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Nova Scotia Human Rights Act

Whereas in April 2014, in response to an application by Trinity Western University (TWU) for accreditation in Nova Scotia, Council passed a resolution to approve TWU’s law degree on the condition that TWU either exempt law students from its Community Covenant or amend the Covenant in a way that ceases to discriminate on grounds prohibited by either or both the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Nova Scotia Human Rights Act;

And whereas in July 2014 the Society amended its regulations to define “law degree” as one approved by the Federation unless the university granting the degree unlawfully discriminates in its admissions or enrolment requirements;

And whereas TWU challenged the April Resolution and the Regulation in the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia;

And whereas the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal found that the Society did not have the jurisdiction to pass the Resolution and Regulation And whereas any decision regarding the TWU law school and the eligibility of its graduates for admission in Nova Scotia is subject to the decisions of both British Columbia’s Minister of Education and the Supreme Court of Canada.

Be it resolved that the amendments to Regulation 3.1 be approved, to return the wording of the regulation to its language before July 2014 with the recognition that this is an interim resolution which is subject to review once both the British Columbia Minister of Education and the Supreme Court of Canada have made final decisions regarding the status of the proposed law school at Trinity Western University.

UPON motion it was moved by Frank DeMont QC and seconded by Julia Cornish QC that the amendments to Regulation 3.1 be approved as presented. Motion passed.


of 96

6

c) Items for Information i. September 12, 2016 Westminster Legal Policy Forum: The legal services

market - regulation, innovation and the future of the Legal Services Act

ii. 2016 International Regulators Conference Summary J. Mullenger was present and outlined the input from worldwide regulators.

iii. Governance & Nominating Committee Recruitment and nomination of Second Vice-President Memo from GNC

Jill Perry, Chair of the GNC, referred to their work plan which incorporates the initiative of recruitment and nomination of Second Vice-President. The GNC requests Council’s nomination for Second Vice-President by end of January. The request will also be posted InForum, equity committees, and she encouraged Council to consider and solicit candidates to apply that fit the skills and attributes needed.

4. IMPROVING THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE



c) Items for information Memo J. Willwerth Access to Justice Week Activities

5. FOUNDATIONAL ACTIVITIES


i.

b) Items for Information i. Oral report from President on FLSC Conference Along with Julia Cornish QC, Frank DeMont QC and Darrel Pink, Executive Director he attended the FLSC legal education conference last week in St Andrews, NB. In addition to law society officers, academics and deans were present which provided effective interaction with a message that there are different perspectives as an ever changing world and we need to continue to dialogue. A roundtable meeting of the presidents and vice-presidents was also valuable. He mentioned that one of the businesses at the Council meeting was the appointment of their Vice-President and advised that Rene Gallant has withdrawn his candidacy but remains as NSBS/FLSC representative.

c) Items for discussion

i.

6. IN CAMERA

i.

7. ITEMS FOR INFORMATION / REPORTS

i. 2016-2017 Council Calendar

ii. 2016-2017 Activity Plan

iii. Executive Director’s Report - includes highlights of Activity Plan

iv. Communications Strategic Plan

v. The Lawyers Weekly: Closing gap in legal services is major challenge, Cromwell warns

of 96

7

8. MEETINGS Friday, November 25, 2016 9:00 am Full day (meeting plus workshop) Friday, January 20, 2017 9:00 am Friday, February 24, 2017 9:00 am Friday, March 24, 2017 9:00 am Friday, April 28, 2017 9:00 am Friday, May 26 , 2017 9:00 am Thursday, June 15 – Friday, June 16, 2017 Council Orientation Saturday, June 17, 2017 Annual Meeting Schulich School of Law

UPON MOTION by Gavin Giles QC and seconded by Mike Baker the Council Meeting adjourned at 2:05 pm.

of 96

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR SUCCESSION PLANNING WORKING GROUP

These Terms of Reference should be read in conjunction with the Legal Profession Act, the Regulations issued there under, and the Council Policies relating to Committees.

WORKING GROUP – TERMS OF REFERENCE

Type To advise Council

Mandate

Mandate:

To advise Council and make recommendations on all issues relating to implementation of succession planning for lawyers, including how the Society minimises the risks associated with the end of lawyers’ careers

Responsibilities

To review information and resources from the Society and other jurisdictions on succession planning for lawyers

Bringing a Triple P perspective, provide information and options to Council on the form succession planning and any necessary requirements for effective planning should take for lawyers in all areas of practice

To consider how incentives might assist lawyers in the implementation of

succession planning

To enhance the resources available for lawyers, review and make recommendations on appropriate resources to be made available to lawyers

Composition At least four members who bring perspectives from various parts of the province and practice types

Chair To be appointed by Council

Procedures and Work Product

The Committee shall operate in accordance with Council Policy 16 The WG will present a report to Council identifying the issues that may be

appropriate for regulatory response from a Triple P perspective

Reporting The Committee is advisory to Council

Staff support Executive Director

of 96

- 1 -

MEMORANDUM TO COUNCIL

From: Jacqueline Mullenger

Date: November 3, 2016

Subject: Regulation 3.5 – Principals and Supervising Lawyers

For: Approval X

Introduction

Information

Recommendation/Motion: Be it resolved that regulation 3.5 be amended as set out in the attached regulatory amendment chart. Analysis: This memo came before Council in October. After the motion was passed, staff realized that some of the changes had made their way into the document put before you. We have now included those changes in the regulatory amendments. As a result of our review of various credentialing processes, staff have determined that regulation 3.5, which is the regulation dealing with principals and supervising lawyers.

As the Regulations are currently drafted, the Executive Director must approve a principal’s application if it meets all eligibility requirements, but has no discretion to vary the eligibility requirements. See regulations 3.5.6 and 3.5.7. If eligibility requirements are to be varied, it requires a decision of Council pursuant to section 6.3 of the Legal Profession Act. Currently, the Regulations require an individual principal to be a practicing lawyer who has held practising status for the five years immediately preceding the application. Subregulation 1.1.1(x) defines “practising lawyer” – “Practising lawyer” means a lawyer who holds a practising certificate.

of 96

- 2 -

In recent years, we have received principal applications from lawyers who have changed their membership status to non-practising for the purposes of taking a parental or other leave, but who had otherwise practised for at least five years. Because the practising status was interrupted during the immediately preceding five years, the application had to be brought to Council to be approved. There were no concerns that the applicant was not qualified to act as a principal, but the period of leave made them ineligible on a “technicality.” Likewise, lawyers transfer to Nova Scotia after practising in other jurisdictions. If their practising experience equals five years or more, but they obtained their Nova Scotia practising certificate within the previous five years, they would not qualify. As a result the Credentials Committee has recommended that the regulations be amended to permit the Executive Director to use his discretion in altering this requirement when it is in the public interest to do so. In addition, amendments have been made to permit the Executive Director to deal with situations where the principal has a charge or conviction but has not yet been sanctioned by the Society. By granting the Executive Director some discretion the Society is better able to respond to situations that affect not only the principal but also the clerk. For instance, at the moment, if a principal is charged or convicted they automatically lose the ability to be a principal, which has put clerks at risk of losing their articles midyear. This discretion would permit the ED to determine that in some circumstances it may be better to permit the principal to continue until the end of the clerk’s term with appropriate supervision. This, in our opinion is more principled, proactive and proportionate. Finally, language was cleaned up to ensure that the regulations are more consistent. Respectfully, Jacqueline L. Mullenger Director, Education & Credentials

of 96

REGULATION AMENDMENTS

1

Existing Regulation Proposed Regulation Rationale

3.5 Application to be a Principal 3.5.1 A practising lawyer, a law firm or an

office of a law firm which has more than one office in the Province may apply to be a principal.

Eligibility 3.5.2 To be a principal, a practicing lawyer or

a law firm must, (a) if the applicant is a practising

lawyer, have practised for at least five years immediately preceding becoming a principal;

(b) if the applicant is a law firm or an office of a law firm of at least 2 practising lawyers, designate one practising lawyer of the firm or office who individually qualifies to be a principal, to be the supervising lawyer responsible for the Education Plan and individual Articling Plans and to oversee the educational experience; [

(c) not be prohibited from being a principal by a Hearing Panel or as a result of the processes prescribed by Part III of the Act;

(d) not have been convicted of any charges pursuant to Part III within 3 years from the date of the application to be a principal;

3.5 Application to be a Principal 3.5.1 A practising lawyer, a law firm or an

office of a law firm which has more than one office in the Province may apply to be a principal.

Eligibility 3.5.2 To be a principal, a practicing lawyer or

a law firm must, (a) if the applicant is a practising

lawyer, have practised for at least five years immediately preceding becoming a principal, unless the applicant requests and is granted an exemption by the Executive Director;

(a) (b) if the applicant is a law firm or an

office of a law firm of at least 2 practising lawyers, designate one practising lawyer of the firm or office who individually qualifies to be a principal, to be the supervising lawyer responsible for the Education Plan and individual Articling Plans and to oversee the educational experience;

(c) not be prohibited from being a principal by a Hearing Panel or as a result of the processes prescribed by Part III of the Act;

There are situations when it would be useful for the Executive Director to exercise discretion to allow a lawyer who has not held practising status continuously for the five years immediately preceding the application to be a principal. For example, we have received applications from lawyers who have held practising membership for at least five years, but not continuously for the five years immediately preceding the application as they changed to non-practising status during maternity leave. We have also received applications from lawyers who have transferred to Nova Scotia after practising in another jurisdiction. If one only counts the Nova Scotia practise, they do not qualify, but would qualify if the experience in the other jurisdiction is considered. This permits the ED to deal with situations where the principal may have been charged or convicted but not yet sanctioned by the Society. Currently, the Executive Director has no discretion on principal’s applications. This regulatory change would bring the Executive Director’s decision making in line with other applications under the Regulations. The ED would still refer to the Credentials Committee any applications that raise issues under 3.5.4(i) and (j) which are the equivalent of character and fitness issues. We changed the wording “The

Formatted: Font: Italic, Underline

Formatted

of 96

- 2 -


(e) not have any outstanding charges pursuant to Part III of the Act;

(f) not have any practice restrictions imposed by order of the Complaints Investigation Committee or otherwise under the Act or Regulations;

(g) have an Education Plan that meets the Committee’s prescribed requirements for Education Plans; and

(h) have an Articling Plan that meets the Committee’s prescribed requirements for Articling Plans;

(i) demonstrate a commitment and ability to provide articled clerks with an articling experience in which the educational component is of paramount importance;

(j) demonstrate a commitment and ability to provide supervision and feedback to articled clerks;

(d) not have been convicted of any charges pursuant to Part III within 3 years from the date of the application to be a principal;

(e) not have any outstanding charges pursuant to Part III of the Act; (e)

(f) not be charged with or plead guilty to or be found guilty of any offence under the

i) Criminal Code (Canada) ii) Controlled Drug and

Substances Act (Canada) iii) Income Tax Act (Canada) iv) Securities Act ofor any province

of Canada;

Within 3 years from the date of the application to be a principal.

(g) not be participating in the Fitness to

Practice program;

(h) not have been suspended for any reason pursuant to Part III of the Act;pursuant to Part III;

(i) not have any practice restrictions imposed by order of the Complaints Investigation Committee or otherwise under the Act or Regulations;

(j) have an Education Plan that meets the Committee’s prescribed requirements for Education Plans; and

(k) have an Articling Plan that meets

Executive Director shall approve..” and “shall deny” to “may approve” and “may deny” and included language about the public interest, so that it is clear that the Executive Director may only waive the qualification regarding five consecutive years of practicing membership if it is in the public interest to do so. Again, this permits the ED to determine if the charges or practice restrictions preclude the Principal from continuing for the duration of the articling period.)

Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.75", No bullets or numbering

of 96

- 3 -


Content of Application 3.5.3 An application to be a principal shall be in a prescribed form and shall provide:

(a) the name of the practicing lawyer or law firm;

(b) confirmation the practicing lawyer or law firm is eligible to be a principal;

(c) a proposed or previously approved Education Plan;

(d) a proposed Articling Plan to be used by the principal when entering into a specific Articling Agreement with an articled clerk;

(e) such other information as may be required by the Executive Director.

Content of Plans 3.5.4 The Committee shall, in general terms, prescribe the requirements for Education Plans and Articling Plans. Application to Executive Director 3.5.5 An application under this regulation shall be made to the Executive Director.

the Committee’s prescribed requirements for Articling Plans;

(l) demonstrate a commitment and ability to provide articled clerks with an articling experience in which the educational component is of paramount importance;

(m) demonstrate a commitment and ability to provide supervision and feedback to articled clerks;

Request for exemption 3.5.2.1 The Executive Director may exempt an applicant from subregulation 3.5.2(a) if it is appropriate to do so. Content of Application 3.5.3 An application to be a principal must be in a prescribed form and must provide:

(a) the name of the practicing lawyer or law firm;

(b) confirmation the practicing lawyer or law firm is eligible to be a principal;

(c) a proposed or previously approved Education Plan;

(d) a proposed Articling Plan to be used by the principal when entering into a specific Articling Agreement with an articled clerk; and

(e) such other information as may be required by the Executive Director.

Content of Plans 3.5.4 The Committee must, in general terms, prescribe the requirements for Education Plans and Articling Plans.

of 96

- 4 -


Decision of Executive Director 3.5.6 If the practicing lawyer or law firm satisfies the requirements of subregulation 3.5.2 the Executive Director shall approve the application to be a principal. 3.5.7 If the practicing lawyer or law firm does not satisfy the requirements of subregulation 3.5.2(a) to 3.5.2(h) the Executive Director shall deny the application to be a principal. 3.5.8 The decision of the Executive Director under this subregulation is final.

Referral to Committee 3.5.9 If the Executive Director has reason to believe that the practicing lawyer or law firm does not satisfy the requirements of subregulation 3.5.2 (i) or 3.5.2 (j) the Executive Director shall forward the application to the Committee for consideration. Detailed Review by Committee of Some Applications 3.5.10 In determining if the practicing lawyer or law firm satisfies the requirements of subregulation 3.5.2 (i) or 3.5.2 (j) the Committee may:

(a) review materials submitted by the practicing lawyer or law firm; and

(b) review other relevant information in the possession of the Society;

Application to Executive Director3.5.5 An application under this Regulation must be made to the Executive Director. Decision of Executive Director 3.5.6 The Executive Director may, where it is in the public interest to do so: (a) approve the application to be a principal, or (b) subject to subregulation 3.5.2.1, deny the application, if the practicing lawyer or law firm does not satisfy the requirements of subregulation 3.5.2(a) to 3.5.2(k). 3.5.7 Deleted 3.5.8 The decision of the Executive Director under subregulation 3.5.6 is final.

Referral to Committee 3.5.9 The Executive Director must refer the application to the Committee if the practicing lawyer or law firm does not satisfy the requirements of subregulation 3.5.2 (l) or 3.5.2(m) Detailed Review by Committee of Some Applications 3.5.10 In determining if the practicing lawyer or law firm satisfies the requirements of subregulation 3.5.2 (l) or 3.5.2 (m) the

of 96

- 5 -


Material and Information to Applicant 3.5.11 The Committee shall provide a copy of all materials and other information reviewed by the Committee pursuant to subregulation 3.5.10 to the practicing lawyer or law firm.

Prior to Denial of Application 3.5.12 The Committee shall not dismiss an application referred pursuant to subregulation 3.5.9 unless, prior to making its final decision, it provides the practicing lawyer or law firm with an opportunity to provide written submissions and any further information.

Written Reasons 3.5.13 The Committee shall provide the practicing lawyer or law firm with written reasons for a dismissal. [DELETED] Validity of approval 3.5.14 The Committee may approve an application referred pursuant to subregulation 3.5.9 and may impose such terms on its approval as it deems fit and proper. Decision is Final 3.5.15 The decision of the Committee under subregulation 3.5.13 or 3.5.14 is final.

Committee may:(a) review materials submitted by the

practicing lawyer or law firm; and (b) review other relevant information in

the possession of the Society.; Material and Information to Applicant 3.5.11 The Committee must provide a copy of all materials and other information reviewed by the Committee pursuant to subregulation 3.5.10 to the practicing lawyer or law firm.

Opportunity for Submissions 3.5.12 The Committee must not dismiss an application referred pursuant to subregulation 3.5.9 unless, prior to making its final decision, it provides the practicing lawyer or law firm with an opportunity to provide written submissions and any further information. Dismissal of Application 3.5.12.1 The Committee may dismiss an application if the practicing lawyer or law firm does not satisfy the requirements of subregulation 3.5.2(i) through (m). 3.5.15 13 - DELETED Approval of Application 3.5.1413 The Committee may approve an application referred pursuant to subregulation 3.5.9 and may impose such terms on its approval as it deems appropriate.

of 96

- 6 -


Replacement of Responsible Lawyer in Firm 3.5.16 If the supervising lawyer responsible for the Education Plan and individual Articling Plans and to oversee the educational experience for articled clerks in a law firm or office of a law firm ceases to be the supervising lawyer, the law firm or office of the law firm shall

(a) notify the Executive Director, and (b) advise the Executive Director of the

name of the new supervising lawyer following which the Executive Director may require the law firm or office of the law firm to re-apply to be a principal or may take such other steps as the Executive Director deems appropriate.

Withdrawal of Principal 3.5.17 If

(a) a principal has been suspended for any reason;

(b) a principal has been charged pursuant to Part III of the Act;

(c) a principal has any practice restrictions imposed by order of the Complaints Investigation Committee or otherwise under the Act or Regulations;

(d) a principal no longer demonstrates a commitment and ability to provide articled clerks with an articling experience in which the educational

Written Reaons 3.5.14 The Committee must provide the practicing lawyer or law firm with written reasons. Decision is Final 3.5.1515 The decision of the Committee under subregulation 3.5.12.1 or 3.5.14 is final. Replacement of Responsible Lawyer in Firm 3.5.16 If the supervising lawyer responsible for the Education Plan and individual Articling Plans and to oversee the educational experience for articled clerks in a law firm or office of a law firm ceases to be the supervising lawyer, the law firm or office of the law firm must

(a) notify the Executive Director, and (b) advise the Executive Director of the

name of the new supervising lawyer. following which the Executive Director may require the law firm or office of the law firm to re-apply to be a principal or may take such other steps as the Executive Director deems appropriate. .

New Application 3.5.16.1 The Executive Director may require the proposed new supervising lawyer to apply to be a principal or take such other steps as the Executive Director deems appropriate. Withdrawal of Principal 3.5.17 If a principal has been suspended for any reason the Executive Director must withdraw the privilege of being a principal and

Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.75", Line spacing: Exactly 12 pt

of 96

- 7 -


component is of paramount importance;

(e) a principal no longer demonstrates a commitment and ability to provide supervision and feedback to articled clerks

the Executive Director shall withdraw the privilege of being a principal, except if the Executive Director has reason to believe that subregulation 3.5.17(d) or 3.5.17(e) apply, and shall take appropriate action with respect to the articled clerk.

Referral to Committee 3.5.18 In the event that the Executive Director has reason to believe that subregulation 3.5.17(d) or 3.5.17(e) apply to a principal, the Executive Director shall forward the matter to the Committee for consideration. Detailed Review by Committee 3.5.19 In determining if subregulation 3.5.17(d) or 3.5.17(e) apply to a principal, the Committee may:

(a) review materials submitted by the principal; and

(b) review other relevant information in the possession of the Society;

Material and Information to Applicant 3.5.20 The Committee shall provide a copy of all materials and other information reviewed by the Committee pursuant to subregulation 3.5.19 to the principal.

must take appropriate action with respect to the articled clerk... . 3.5.17.1 If a principal:

(a) has been charged pursuant to Part III of the Act;

(a)(b) has been suspended pursuant to Part III of the Act;

(b)(c) has any practice restrictions imposed by order of the Complaints Investigation Committee or otherwise under the Act or Regulations;

(c)(d) no longer demonstrates a commitment and ability to provide articled clerks with an articling experience in which the educational component is of paramount importance;

(d)(e) no longer demonstrates a commitment and ability to provide supervision and feedback to articled clerks

the Executive Director may withdraw the privilege of being a principal,and must take appropriate action with respect to the articled clerk

Referral to Committee 3.5.18 The Executive Director must refer the matter to the Committee if subregulation 3.5.17.1(cd) or 3.5.17.1(de) apply to a principal. Review by Committee 3.5.19 In determining if subregulation 3.5.17.1(c) or 3.5.17.1(d) apply to a principal, the Committee may:

of 96

- 8 -


Prior to Withdrawal of Privilege to be Principal 3.5.21 The Committee shall not withdraw the privilege to be a principal pursuant to subregulation 3.5.18 unless, prior to making its final decision, it provides the principal with an opportunity to provide written submissions and any further information.

Written Reasons 3.5.22 The Committee shall provide the principal with written reasons if the privilege to be a principal is withdrawn. Decision is Final 3.5.23 The decision of the Committee under subregulation 3.5.22 is final. Termination by Principal 3.5.24 A principal may apply to the Executive Director to terminate an Articling Agreement by providing information required to allow the Executive Director to consider the application. Approval on terms 3.5.25 The Executive Director may approve an application under subregulation 3.5.24 on such terms as the Executive Director deems appropriate. Limitation on Number of Articled Clerks 3.5.26 A principal, who is a practising lawyer, may only employ one articled clerk, unless an

(a) review materials submitted by the principal; and (b) review other relevant information in the possession of the Society;

Material and Information to Principal 3.5.20 The Committee must provide a copy of all materials and other information reviewed by the Committee pursuant to subregulation 3.5.19 to the principal.

Opportunity for Submissions 3.5.21 The Committee must not withdraw the privilege to be a principal pursuant to unless, prior to making its final decision, it provides the principal with an opportunity to provide written submissions and any further information. Withdrawal of Privilege 3.5.21.1 If the Committee determines that subregulation 3.5.17.1(c) or 3.5.17.1(d) apply to a principal, then it must withdraw the privilege to be a principal.

Written Reasons 3.5.22 The Committee must provide the principal with written reasons if the privilege to be a principal is withdrawn. Decision is Final 3.5.23 The decision of the Committee under subregulation 3.5.21.1 is final. Termination by Principal 3.5.24 A principal may apply to the Executive Director to terminate an Articling Agreement by providing information required to allow the

of 96

- 9 -


articled clerk has been allowed to extend the Articling Agreement, pursuant to subregulation 3.4.2(h), in which case the Executive Director may allow the principal to employ a second articled clerk. Limitation on Number of Articled Clerks - Firm 3.5.27 A law firm or office of a law firm, acting as principal, may only employ as many articled clerks as there are practising lawyers in the firm or office of the law firm who would qualify to be principals under this regulation.

Executive Director to consider the application. Approval on terms 3.5.25 The Executive Director may approve an application under subregulation 3.5.24 on such terms as the Executive Director deems appropriate. Limitation on Number of Articled Clerks 3.5.26 A principal may only employ one articled clerk, unless an articled clerk has been allowed to extend the Articling Agreement, pursuant to subregulation 3.4.2(h), in which case the Executive Director may allow the principal to employ a second articled clerk. Limitation on Number of Articled Clerks - Firm 3.5.27 A law firm or office of a law firm, acting as principal, may only employ as many articled clerks as there are practising lawyers in the firm or office of the law firm who would qualify to be principals under this Regulation.

of 96


From: Darrel Pink


Subject: Request for Amendments to the Legal Profession Act - Package 2 Date – Oct. 14/16 – Council make-up and Pt iii

Executive Committee Referred to Council

Date – October 28, 2016 November 25

Council Oct – 25 Council requested additional information

Recommendation/Motion: Approve this portion of the ‘Request for Legislation.’ Executive Summary: This portion of the request for amendments to the Legal Profession Act has been prepared to reflect some of the proposals that government has been circulating regarding self-regulating professions and the consultation regarding them, and a modernization of our statutory language regarding law Corporations. Council

1. The government has circulated a discussion paper regarding self-regulated professions. The Policy proposal is attached as Appendix 1. Though not yet adopted as final policy, it does identify a number of practices that are now widely accepted as elements of good governance. The two most directly connected to us relate the size of the Board of Directors (Council). This allows us to look at the number of public representatives on Council and whether there should be statutory positions any longer.

2. On the later point discussions with the former Deputy AG and the former Dean of the Schulich School of Law allowed for the conclusion that relations between the Society and the Department of Justice and the Schulich School of Law at Dalhousie University are not effectively managed through representation on Council. Rather they require a more specific form of engagement that should be part of the Society’s strategic engagement and communications work. The specifics of this will be discussed further with Dean Cameron in a meeting scheduled for later in the year.

3. Council asked for information about the status in other provinces. British Columbia - 3 schools – no vote Alberta – 2 schools – no vote

of 96

Saskatchewan – 1 school - vote Manitoba – 1 school - vote Ontario – 7 schools – no vote Quebec – 4 schools – no vote New Brunswick – 2 schools - vote

4. Further our percentage of public representatives on Council is toward the lower numbers in the country and well below the 33% advocated by government. If the two statutory positions are removed and replaced with public members of Council we will be at 25%.

5. The other proposed changes are of a clean-up variety. For example the Act addresses election and appointment to Council but is not clear that lawyer members could be appointed as well as elected. In light of the matters raised by the Governance & Nominating Committee, it should be clear that appointment of lawyers, such as to fill a vacancy, is permitted.

6. The request that falls under this heading are the following:

a. Here and throughout the Act amend ‘shall’ to ‘must’;

b. In s. 7, delete the two statutory positions on Council – the representative of the Attorney General and the Dean of the Faculty of Law at Dalhousie University;

c. Increase the number of ‘persons who are not members of the Society’ from

three to five;

d. In s. 7(2) clarify that appointed members of Council may be either public representatives or lawyers;

e. In s. 11 clarify that Council may make regulations regarding the election of the

‘officers’;

f. make required amendments to reflect the need for member records to deal with licensed paralegals.

Law Corporations 7. The current provisions relating to law corporations are the original language that introduced them

in the old Barristers and Solicitors Act. They are extremely detailed and have far more in them than modern drafting would require. The nature of the proposed amendments in this area is generally not to change the intention of the current language or the requirements for law corporations, but to ‘clean-up’ the language so that it is clearer and more in keeping with other similar legislation in other provinces.

8. Included in this type of change are: a. a proposal to simplify the requirements relating to non-voting shares by removing the

restrictions in the legislation and allowing Council to prescribe them by regulation; b. Define ‘voting shares’ as a share entitling the holder to vote under all circumstances at

meetings of shareholders or entitled to vote on the election of any directors; c. Permit voting shares to be held by another Law Corporation; d. Remove the requirement for officers of the corporation to be lawyers;

of 96

9. There are a couple of specific amendments required to address some changes in the law. There is a Supreme Court of Nova Scotia case1 that addresses the issue of ‘trusts’ and corporations. As has been done in other provinces, it is necessary to override this case and to allow law corporations to hold money in trust without necessarily complying with the ….Act. As well it is necessary to address the situation of the suspension of a lawyer who practices through a law corporation. In that case the law corporation should not be able to carry on business without changing its name so that it does not appear to be entitled to practice law.

10. The request that falls under this heading are the following:

a. Remove the restriction on non-voting shares in subsections 21(2) and (4) and the restrictions in 21(6) and (8). Replace 23(g) with authority for Council to make regulations prescribing restrictions on who may hold non-voting shares of Law Corporations.

b. Add a definition of “voting share” - meaning a share entitling the holder to vote under all circumstances at meetings of shareholders or entitled to vote on the election of any directors.

c. Simplify the provisions for holding companies by replacing 21(3) with the requirement that voting shares of a Law Corporation may be held by another Law Corporation.

d. Remove the restriction on “officers” in 22(1) but leave the restriction on directors. Add a requirement that the “President” or “Chief Executive Officer” must be a practicing lawyer.

e. Subsections 22(2) and (3) are not required and can both be removed.

f. Add a provision that the prohibition in subsection 211(2) of the Trust and Loan Companies Act does not apply to Law Corporations.

g. Add a provision authorizing the Executive Director to direct that the name of a corporation be changed, if that corporation does not hold a valid permit and the name of the corporation denotes that the corporation carries on the practice of law. If the name change is not effected within two months of notice from the direction from the Executive Director, the corporation may not carry on business in Nova Scotia and if the corporation is incorporated under the laws of Nova Scotia the Executive Director may request the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies to change the name pursuant to section 16 of the Companies Act.

1 University of Kings College v. Edwards Dean and Company, 2006 NSSC 341

of 96

Policy respecting Self-Regulated Professions

Policy Statement

It is the policy of the Nova Scotia government to establish self-regulated professions only when

self-regulation is determined to be in the best interests of the public.

Definitions

“Advisory Committee on Self-regulation” means the interdepartmental working group

established for purposes of developing and sharing knowledge and expertise respecting self-

regulated professions or occupations, and providing advice to departments and, when requested,

to Treasury and Policy Board. Terms of reference for the Advisory Group are set out in Schedule

C to this Policy.

“Guide” means the document entitled “Self-regulation in Nova Scotia: A Guide for Nova Scotia

Government Departments” attached as Schedule B.

“Responsible department” means the department that is asked to analyze a proposal for new or

amended legislation respecting a self-regulated profession.

“Responsible Minister” means the Minister assigned responsibility for the legislation governing

a self-regulated profession.

“Self-regulated profession” means an occupation or profession that has been authorized by

government to regulate its own members.

Policy Objectives

The objectives of the policy are to ensure that Treasury and Policy Board receives complete,

accurate and relevant information upon which to make decisions respecting self-regulated

professions and to ensure consistency in the content of submissions requesting new or amended

legislation.

Application

The policy applies to any request for new legislation establishing a self-regulated profession, and

any amendments to existing legislation governing a self-regulated profession.

Policy Directives

1. In general, no legislative request to establish a new self-regulated profession may be

submitted to Executive Council until the responsible department is able to demonstrate

that:

a. The proposed self-regulation addresses substantial risks to individual clients

and/or the public, which are not remote and cannot be addressed more efficiently

and effectively through other means.

of 96

b. The members of the proposed profession have the capacity to self-regulate – that

is,

i. they are sufficiently well-organized and have the financial and human

resources needed to assume responsibility for self-regulation

ii. they have demonstrated a commitment to democratic principles, including

principles of fundamental justice, in their dealings with one another,

clients and the general public; and

iii. they have demonstrated they are able to act collectively in the best

interests of clients and the general public.

c. The majority of the proposed members deliver services in circumstances where

they are not and cannot be effectively supervised by others, and clients are unable

to assess the quality of services provided.

d. There is a defined route of entry to the profession and a body of knowledge that

could form the basis of practice standards.

e. The anticipated benefits of establishing the new profession outweigh any negative

impacts of doing so (including increased costs to consumers, government and

other professions, reduced access to services, and barriers to labour mobility and

immigration).

f. The proposed legislation conforms with the requirements set out in Schedule A.

g. The issues and recommendations set out in the Guide have been considered by the

responsible department.

2. No request to amend existing legislation in respect to a self-regulated profession may be

submitted to Executive Council unless the responsible department is able to demonstrate

that:

a. The amendments are needed to address substantial risks to individual clients

and/or the public, which are not remote and cannot be addressed more efficiently

and effectively through other means.

b. The anticipated benefits of making the amendments outweigh any negative

impacts of doing so.

c. The proposed amendments comply with any requirements set out in Schedule A

that relate to matters addressed by the amendments.

d. The department has concluded a more comprehensive review of the existing

statute is not needed at present, taking into account:

i. The history of the existing legislation;

ii. Whether existing legislation is consistent with government’s current

expectations of self-regulated professions;

iii. Whether the profession’s governing body, through its actions as a

regulator, has demonstrated a robust capacity and commitment to

governing the profession in the public interest; and

iv. The significance and urgency of the risk(s) the proposed amendments are

designed to address.

of 96

Policy Guidelines

Policy guidelines are set out in the Guide attached as Schedule B, which Guide may be revised

from time to time with the approval of Treasury and Policy Board or the Clerk of Executive

Council.

Accountability

Deputy Ministers are accountable for ensuring the requirements of the Policy have been met

before a legislative proposal is submitted to Executive Council for consideration.

Monitoring

Executive Council Office is responsible for monitoring implementation of the Policy, with input

and advice from the Advisory Committee on Self-regulation.

References

None.

Enquiries

Executive Director, Operations

Executive Council Office

(902) 424-8009

of 96

Schedule A

Requirements for new or amended legislation

in respect to self-regulated professions*

1. The legislation clearly articulates a mandate for the profession, which provides that the

primary duty of the profession is to regulate itself in the public interest.

2. The proposed legislation establishes basic rules in respect to:

a. The composition of the profession’s governing body;

b. The profession’s scope of practice

c. Registration requirements;

d. Investigation and resolution of complaints; and

e. Rights of review and appeal in respect to registration decisions and disciplinary

processes.

3. The proposed legislation complies with the requirements of the Fair Registration

Practices Act and applicable trade agreements.

4. The proposed legislation creates registration, complaints investigation and disciplinary

procedures in compliance with principles of fundamental justice and the Canadian

Charter or Rights and Freedoms

5. At least one third of the members of the governing board and committees established for

purposes of reviewing registration decisions and for investigating and disciplining

members are public representatives appointed by government

6. The legislation creates appropriate mechanisms for ensuring accountability reporting to

members of the profession, the responsible Minister and the general public.

7. The legislation is drafted in accordance with the following principles:

a. Legislation and regulations governing self-regulated professions should be drafted

in accordance with the same principles that apply to other sorts of legislation and

regulations;

b. In the interest of transparency, matters of interest to those outside the profession

(including government, the general public, potential members, employers and or

clients/patients) should be dealt with in legislation or regulations made or

approved by government rather than in by-laws;

c. Only matters that are administrative (not legislative) in nature and internal to the

profession should normally be dealt with in by-laws, and by-laws should require

approval of the membership; and

d. In determining whether a matter will be dealt with in the legislation, regulations

or by-laws, the department should consider the following questions:

i. Whose interests may be affected?

ii. Who needs ready access to the rules?

iii. Is public accountability and transparency needed to maintain public

confidence in the profession and/or the legislative scheme?

iv. Is the matter one that could have significant implications for clients, the

public and/or some segment of the profession?

v. How frequently do the rules respecting the matter require amendments?

of 96

Schedule B

Self-regulation in Nova Scotia: A Guide for Nova Scotia Government Departments

of 96

Schedule C

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON SELF-REGULATION

Purpose

The purpose of the Advisory Committee is to provide advice and support to government

departments and offices charged with making recommendations in respect to legislative

and regulatory proposals respecting self-regulated professions.

Guiding Principles

The Advisory Committee works collaboratively to maintain a sound understanding of

best practices in regards to self-regulated professions and to achieve common objectives.

The Advisory Committee respects a diversity of opinion while working to achieve a

corporate consensus on issues of concern to government.

Roles and Responsibilities

Contribute to developing a better understanding across government of principles and best

practices in respect to self-regulated professions and departments’ roles in respect to

them.

Review and make recommendations in respect to amending the Treasury and Policy

Board Policy respecting Self-regulated Professions as needed.

Review and update “Self-regulation in Nova Scotia: A Guide for Nova Scotia

Government Departments” and the accompanying Fact Sheet for Proponents as needed.

As requested, share insights and expertise with government departments responsible for

reviewing legislative or regulatory proposals respecting self-regulated professions.

Review legislative or regulatory proposals respecting self-regulation when requested to

do so by Treasury and Policy Board or Executive Council.

Information/Reporting

The Advisory Committee will provide an annual report on its activities to the Deputy

Minister responsible for Treasury and Policy Board.

Procedures

Members will make best efforts to attend all Committee meetings.

Alternates may attend Advisory Committee meetings to ensure continuity of

participation.

Composition

The Advisory Committee will consist of representatives appointed by a broad range of

government departments and offices, including at least the following: the Department of

Justice, the Department of Health and Wellness, the Office of Service Nova Scotia, the

of 96

Department of Labour and Advanced Education, the Office of Immigration, and

Executive Council Office.

Advisory Committee meetings will be coordinated by representatives of Executive

Council Office (or LAE) and the Department of Health and Wellness.

Frequency of Meetings

The Advisory Committee will meet at least annually to consider whether amendments to

the Policy, Guide, Fact Sheet or these Terms of Reference should be recommended.

of 96

REGULATION AMENDMENTS

1


7.2 Law Firms 7.2.1 A law firm must (a) designate one practising lawyer to receive official communications from the Society, including a complaint against the firm under Part 9 of these Regulations and communications regarding an LRA Audit under Part 13 of these Regulations; (b) file with the Executive Director an annual law firm report, in the prescribed form, that provides (i) the names of all members of the Society associated with the firm, and the nature of their association, ii) the location and particulars of all trust accounts and firm bank accounts maintained by the firm, (iii) the names and responsibilities of employees of the firm, or others, who maintain the accounting records of the firm; (iv) such other information as may be required by Council; (c) if the firm has held in trust money or property at any time in the last twelve months, within three months of the end of its fiscal year, file with the Executive Director an annual trust report, in the prescribed form, reporting on trust accounts and books and records of account of the law firm and all practising lawyers in the firm; and

7.2 Law Firms 7.2.1 A law firm must (a) designate one practising lawyer to receive official communications from the Society, including (i) a complaint against the firm under Part 9 of these Regulations (ii) reports regarding an LRA Audit under Part 13 of these Regulations; (iii) a copy of each complaint against a member of the Society associated with the firm under Part 9 of these Regulations, received or being investigated under section 35 of the Act; (iv) a copy of each determination or decision made pursuant to Part 9 of these Regulations by the Executive Director or the Complaints Investigation Committee, or pursuant to Part III of the Act relating to a member of the Society associated with the firm; and (v) a copy of other materials relating to the processes prescribed by Part III of the Act, if so requested by the designated member, provided that the member of the Society was associated with the firm at the time the matter which is the subject of the complaint took place; (b) file with the Executive Director an annual law firm report, in the prescribed form, that provides (i) the names of all members of the Society associated with the firm, and the nature of their

This amendment combines two regulations that now allow law firms to designate different lawyers for purposes of receiving information from the Society. The vast majority of firms have only one lawyer who fills all these roles and the combination of the regulations will simplify record keeping as we will no longer need to track multiple fields of information while at the same time reflecting the actual circumstances of firms which have all information from the Society directed to a single individual who then deals with as appropriate within the firm. This will also simplify the reporting on the Annual Firm Report. There are also a couple housekeeping amendments included.

of 96

- 2 -


(d) if the firm or an office of the firm with more than one office in the Province is a principal, designate a practising lawyer, who individually qualifies to be a principal, to be the supervising lawyer responsible for the education plan and individual articling plans and to oversee the educational experience of articled clerks Pursuant to Part 3 of these Regulations. (e) maintain foundation documents for on behalf of lawyers practicsing real estate in the firm pursuant to Part 8 of these Regulations, unless the obligation is transferred pursuant to that Part. Designation by Firm - Complaints and Articling 7.2.2 A law firm may, by notice in writing to the Executive Director, designate one or more members of the firm (a) to receive a copy of each complaint against a member of the Society associated with the firm, received or being investigated under section 35 of the Act; (b) to receive a copy of each determination or decision made pursuant to Part 9 of these Regulations by the Executive Director or the Complaints Investigation Committee, or pursuant to Part 3 of the Act relating to a member of the Society associated with the firm; and (c) to receive a copy of other materials relating to the processes prescribed by Part III of the Act, if so requested by the designated member, provided that the member of the Society was associated with the firm at the time the matter which is the subject of the complaint took place

association, (ii) the location and particulars of all trust accounts and firm bank accounts maintained by the firm, (iii) the names and responsibilities of employees of the firm, or others, who maintain the accounting records of the firm; (iv) such other information as may be required by Council; (c) if the firm has held in trust money or property at any time in the last twelve months, within three one month of the end of its fiscal year, file with the Executive Director an annual trust report, in the prescribed form, reporting on trust accounts and books and records of account of the law firm and all practising lawyers in the firm; and (d) if the firm or an office of the firm with more than one office in the Province is a principal, designate a practising lawyer, who individually qualifies to be a principal, to be the supervising lawyer responsible for the education plan and individual articling plans and to oversee the educational experience of articled clerks Pursuant to Part 3 of these Regulations; and (e) maintain foundation documents for on behalf of lawyers practising real estate in the firm pursuant to Part 8 of these Regulations, unless the obligation is transferred pursuant to that Part.

7.2.2 Repeal

of 96

Annual Lawyer/Trust Account Report– Working Copy – NOT FOR SUBMISSION | November 2016 - Page 1 of 12


From: Darrel Pink, Executive Director and Sean Walker, Director, Finance & Admin


Subject: Annual Firm Reporting

Date – N/A Executive Committee

Date – November 25, 2016 Council

Annual Firm Reporting (Compliance and Trust) Update

This memorandum accompanies a Draft Annual Firm Report (AFR) and revised Trust Account Report. This Law Firm Report incorporates the revised Trust Account Report as well. The Society’s goal is to reduce the number of filings by lawyers and we will collect relevant information once. This is a two stage process with the first iteration of this Annual Firm Report form being used starting with December 31, 2016 Trust Account year end reporting and will continue until next year. Also included in this work will be revisions to the Annual Lawyer Report that is filed each June by each practising lawyer. In using risk based decision making and encouraging firms to do likewise, we have incorporated several questions used by other law societies to identify areas which cause difficulties for law firms. Both the Annual Firm and Annual Lawyer Report will deal with risk and compliance areas but at different “levels” at either the Firm or individual lawyer level. For the next year as this type of reporting evolves, the Annual Firm Report will be completed by those lawyers/firms with Trust Accounts. By next year each firm will be required to complete the report (firm being any association, corporation, partnership, proprietorship or individual that practises law. (Examples include sole proprietorships, firms, non-profits, Federal and Provincial Departments of Justice, Corporations, etc.) The Trust Account Report section of the included report includes yellow areas that have been highlighted to indicate new or revised sections, call-out comments have been added to explain the changes. These revisions include requesting additional explanation for non-compliance with Regulations and the request for some additional information that will aid the Society in the work we are doing around risk-focused Triple P Regulation.

In addition, below is a summary breakdown break down of types of questions that will be included in the current (2016/17) reports and in future reports. Annual Firm Report – Current Annual Lawyer Report – Current Firm contact information confirmation Individual lawyer information confirmation

of 96


Employee (lawyer) status confirmation Individual lawyer status confirmation Trust Account compliance (revised) Lawyer demographics Lawyer areas of law and practice Trust compliance Code of Conduct Compliance Succession Planning Records Retention (storage, destruction,

Foundation documents policies, etc.) Annual Firm Report – Future Annual Lawyer Report – Future Firm contact information confirmation Individual lawyer information confirmation Employee (lawyer) status confirmation Individual lawyer status confirmation Trust Account compliance (revised) Lawyer demographics Technology safety/security Lawyer areas of law and practice Records Retention (storage, destruction, Foundation documents policies, etc.)

Code of Conduct Compliance

Excess Insurance Statutory Reporting filings, compliance (Taxes, employee payroll, deductions, etc.)

Succession Planning Bankruptcies/Proposals Loans/Borrowings Judgments, Charges and Convictions Business with Clients, collecting money on client’s behalf, etc.

As this process continues to evolve over the next year(s) we will be reporting back to Council on the findings and information learned from firm/lawyer’s responses and will be asking for your input on the process as we move forward.

DRAFT – ANNUAL FIRM REPORT

[Reg. 7.2.1]1 This Law Firm Report incorporates the Trust Account Report. The Society’s goal is to reduce the number of filings by lawyers and we will collect relevant information once. In using risk based decision making and encouraging firms to do likewise, we have incorporated several questions used by other law societies to identify areas which cause difficulties for law firms. This is a two stage process with the first iteration of this Annual Firm Report form being used until next year.

1 7.2.1 A law firm must (a) designate one practising lawyer to receive official communications from the Society, including a complaint against the firm under Part 9 of these Regulations and communications regarding an LRA Audit under Part 13 of these Regulations; (b) file with the Executive Director an annual law firm report, in the prescribed form, that provide (i) the names of all members of the Society associated with the firm, and the nature of their association, (ii) the location and particulars of all trust accounts and firm bank accounts maintained by the firm,

(iii) the names and responsibilities of employees of the firm, or others, who maintain the accounting records of the firm; (iv) such other information as may be required by Council;

Commented [SW1]: This content will be properly formatted and turned into a questionnaire. This version represents content only.

of 96


GENERAL INFORMATION:

The Trust Account Year End of this Firm is: _____________________________________ The Fiscal Year End of this Firm is: ________________________________________ Interjurisdictional Firm? (List other Jurisdictions) ________________________________________ ADDRESS INFORMATION (pre-populated by NSBS):

- Verification of physical location - Verification of mailing address - Directory listing??

MANAGEMENT OF LAW FIRM (pre-populated by NSBS):

- Contact as per Regulation 7.2.1 (a) _______________________________ - Managing Partner(s) (ability to list more than one) _______________________________ - Administration Contact and Position within Firm_______________________________

EMPLOYEE INFORMATION (pre-populated by NSBS): List all employees/staff of the firm who are practicing lawyers. Please indicate if the lawyer has a current law corporation or is part of a limited liability partnership.

Lawyer Name Status within Firm Lawyer #1

Lawyer #2

Lawyer #3

Lawyer #4

Please provide a listing of any adjustments from the lawyer information above and/or list all employees (lawyers) of the law firm who are practicing lawyers who joined or left the law firm within the reporting time frame so that we may update our records:

Lawyer Name Status within Firm Join Date (if applicable) Departure Date (if applicable)

Name of Firm:

of 96


of 96


DRAFT – REVISED TRUST ACCOUNT REPORT (in accordance with Part 4 and Part 10 of the Regulations of the Legal Profession Act (LPA) )

Instructions This document is a working copy of the Trust Account Report. It can be used for preparing your report for electronic submission to the Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society. All Trust Account Reports are to be submitted electronically via the NSBS Assessment System. All entities that must file a Trust Account Report will have received an email with a link to the NSBS Assessment System for the purpose of filing your report electronically. Any questions about the method of filing or the Trust Account Report in general, can be submitted [email protected].

This report is for:

This report covers the period from ________________________________________ to _______________________________________________ .

** When completing the report electronically, the above three fields will be pre-populated with information specific to your filing, and will

not be editable by the person filing the electronic Trust Account Report** Accounting records are maintained primarily by: Full-time accountant/bookkeeper Part-time accountant/bookkeeper Accounting firm Secretary/Staff Law firm’s principal(s)

Other (please explain below)

Name of person(s) maintaining accounting records:

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Position/Designation/Office of the person(s): _______________________________________________________________________________

The nature of the accounting system is mainly:

Manual (ledger books) Accounting software Other Software Computer Service provider Other (explain)

Name of software used to maintain computerized trust records or “other”: __________________________________________________________________________________

** Your electronic Trust Account Report will be pre-populated with all the general trust accounts of which the Society is aware with respect to your practice. The table that lists these accounts is read-only and cannot be edited. However, if any of the information

provided is outdated or false, there are fields below that will allow you to enter the correct information. Also, please enter any new general trust accounts, or general trust accounts that are not listed. Finally, if a listed trust account is closed, please provide the date of

closure in the following format – MM/DD/YYYY. There is no need to list any specific trust accounts.**

Commented [SW2]: Additional option/clarification

Commented [SW3]: Additional option/clarifications

of 96


During the period covered by this report, the following are all the general trust accounts (including Service Nova Scotia Trust Accounts) we maintained. Please indicate if an account was opened or closed during this period (attach additional sheet if necessary).

Financial institution

# Transit # Account # Opened –

Date Closed –

Date # of Debits Total $

Amount of Debits

# of Credits Total $

Amount of Credits

We confirm that all specific trust accounts have been maintained in accordance with the regulations.

Commented [SW4]: Previously, we only asked for the number of Debit transactions that went through Trust Accounts. In order to get a better sense of the volume and dollar amount of Trust Account transactions that occur we are now asking for the $ amount of the Debits and the number and dollar amount of Credits. This information should be easily obtainable from bank statements. It is gathered by several other law societies.

of 96


During the period covered by this report, the following are all the signatories for the general trust accounts we maintained. Please indicate if an account was opened or closed during this period (attach additional sheet if necessary).

Name of Signatory Position/Title List all the general trust accounts for which they are a Signatory (or All)

How long signing authority for?

Commented [SW5]: In previous iterations of the Trust Account Reports this information was collected. We are refreshing this information to help assess risk of who has signing authority over Trust Accounts.

of 96


Please check the applicable boxes for the following requirements and questions: BOOKS AND RECORDS Regulation Requirement 10.4.1(a) The accounting records have been maintained to allow for accurate identification of trust money

and property

Yes No

10.4.1(b) The books and records have been posted throughout the reporting period on a timely basis. Yes No

10.4.1(c) The accounting records, including source documents, are maintained for at least seven (7) years. Yes No

We maintain: 10.4.2 We confirm that we maintain the books and records as required by the Regulations.

Specifically, we maintain: a book of original entry for all receipts; a book of original entry for all payments; a client ledger identifying receipts, payments and any unexpended balance for each client; a record showing all property held in trust (if applicable); a data source or chronological file of all billings, bank statements, cashed cheques (or digital images) for all accounts; a record of all monthly reconciliations; and, if applicable, a record of all transfers between clients.

** If you answer “No” to the above question, you are required to answer the next 11 questions. If you answer “Yes” to the above question, you can skip the next 11 questions

and go to the next group of questions (“Deposits”).**

Yes No

10.4.2(a) a book of original entry showing the date of receipt and source of trust money for each client and identifying the client on whose behalf the trust money is received;

Yes No

10.4.2(b) a book of original entry showing all payments out of trust money for each client, the date of each payment, the name of each recipient, and identifying the client on whose behalf each payment is made out of trust money;

Yes No

10.4.2(c) a clients’ trust ledger showing separately for each person on whose behalf trust money has been received, all such money received and disbursed and any unexpended balance;

Yes No

10.4.2(d) a record showing all trust property held in trust, and identifying the client on whose behalf the property is held;

Yes No

10.4.2(e) a book of original entry or data source showing the date of receipt and source of all money received other than trust money;

Yes No

10.4.2(f) a book of original entry or data source showing all payments of money other than trust money, the date of each payment and the name of each recipient;

Yes No

10.4.2(g) a book, data source or chronological file of copies of billings showing all fees charged and other billings to clients, the dates such charges are made and identifying the clients so charged;

Yes No

10.4.2(h) bank statements, cashed cheques, which may include a digital image provided by the practising lawyer's financial institution showing both the front and back of the cheque, and detailed deposit slips for all trust and general accounts;

Yes No

10.4.2(i) a record showing a comparison made monthly of the total of balances held in all trust accounts and the total of all unexpended balances of funds held in trust for clients as they appear from the books and records together with the reasons for any differences between the totals and supported by:

i. a detailed listing made monthly showing the amount of trust money held for each client and identifying each client for whom trust money is held; and

Yes No

ii. a detailed reconciliation made monthly of each trust account in a financial institution; Yes No

10.4.2(j) a record showing all transfers of trust money between clients' trust ledger accounts and explaining the purpose for which each transfer is made;

N/A Yes No

of 96


DEPOSITS Question 10.2.1 I acknowledge that I am responsible for all trust money and property received from or on behalf of a client;

and the timely deposit of trust money into a trust account; and identifying the person on whose behalf the money is deposited. I confirm that for the period covered by this report, all trust money was deposited within one day of receipt, was deposited into a trust account, was kept at a financial institution, that I received written confirmation for all deposits, that only trust money was deposited to the trust account, and at no time did I receive $7,500 or more in cash in the course of a single transaction.

**If you answer “No” to the above question, you are required to answer the next 10 questions. If you answer “Yes” to the above question, you can skip the next 10 questions and go to the next group of questions (“Withdrawls”).**

Yes No

4.4

Did any lawyer in the law firm receive or accept $7,500 or more in currency (cash) in the course of a single transaction? If yes, please explain

Yes

No

10.2.3 Was all trust money deposited within one banking day of receipt? Yes No 10.2.4(a) Was all trust money deposited in an account designated as a trust account? Yes No 10.2.4(b) Was the trust account kept at a financial institution as defined in subregulation 10.1.1? Yes No 10.2.4(c) Does the trust account bear interest which is computed and payable to the Law Foundation of Nova Scotia

as required by the Legal Profession Act? Yes No

10.2.5 In the case of funds deposited into the lawyer’s or firm’s trust account by a 3rd party, was written confirmation obtained from the lawyer’s financial institution?

N/A Yes No

10.2.6 Were the funds deposited to the trust account only those described in subregulation 10.2.6? Yes No 10.2.7 At any time during the year were personal (or office operating) funds deposited to the trust account? Yes No 10.2.8 Were any escrow conditions requiring trust money or property to be held without deposit

received in writing? N/A Yes No

10.2.9 At any time was the trust account used where there was no trust relationship? Yes No WITHDRAWALS 10.3.1 I acknowledge that I am responsible for all withdrawals or transfers from a trust account. I confirm that, for

the period covered by this report, money was only withdrawn, if applicable, for payment on account of a client; if applicable, for payment of my fees that were disclosed to the client; if applicable, for the amounts that were inadvertently deposited to the trust account.

** If you answer “No” to the above question, you are required to answer the next 6 questions. If you answer “Yes” to the above question, you can skip the next 6 questions and go to the next

group of questions (“Form of withdrawal”).**

Yes No

All money was withdrawn from a trust account only in accordance with Regulation 10.3.4, namely:

10.3.4(a) for payment on account of a client; N/A Yes No

10.3.4(b) money that was deposited inadvertently into a trust account in contravention of the regulations;

N/A Yes No

10.3.4(c) money properly required for or toward payment of the practising lawyer's or law firm's fees that have been disclosed to the client;

N/A Yes No

10.3.4(d) as authorized in writing by a person designated by the Society; N/A Yes No

10.3.4(e) as directed by a Court of competent jurisdiction; N/A Yes No 10.3.3

I can confirm that all money due the lawyer/law firm was promptly removed from the trust account.

Yes

No

Commented [SW6]: This question is also asked in the Annual Lawyer Report. We are trying to only ask once and request additional information on the nature of the cash transaction as we determine if this is an increased risk area. It will come out of the Annual Lawyer Report

Commented [SW7]: Added the tie to the Foundation and interest paid

of 96


FORM OF WITHDRAWAL 10.3.5 I confirm that all withdrawals from the trust account were done in accordance with Regulation

10.3.5. Specifically, all withdrawals were made to a named payee; made by at least one practising lawyer; made by two persons; not released until I was in possession of the funds for the client; and not released until I had sufficient knowledge of the withdrawal to ensure the client’s interests were protected.

** If you answer “No” to the above question, you are required to answer the next 8 questions. If you answer “Yes” to the above question, you can skip the next 8 questions

and go to the next group of questions (“OVERDRAFTS”).**

Yes No

10.3.5(a) I confirm that all withdrawals were made to a named payee; N/A Yes No 10.3.5(b) I confirm that all withdrawals were made by at least two persons, at least one of whom

is a practising lawyer; N/A Yes No

10.3.6

If no to previous question – is the practising lawyer a sole practitioner and was the withdrawal made by the lawyer only? Choose “N/A” if answer to previous question was "Yes".

N/A

Yes

No

10.3.5(c)

I confirm that all withdrawals were made identifying the trust account from which the funds are withdrawn and the date on which the funds are withdrawn;

N/A

Yes

No

10.3.5(d)

I confirm that all withdrawals were released from the lawyer’s office only after the lawyer or law firm was in possession of funds for the credit of the client on whose behalf the withdrawal was made;

N/A

Yes

No

10.3.5(e)

I confirm that all withdrawals were not released or effected until the practising lawyer had sufficient knowledge of the withdrawal to ensure that the client's interests were protected.

N/A

Yes

No

10.3.7

Did anyone make a withdrawal from any of the firm’s trust accounts by way of a debit card or similar instrument?

N/A

Yes

No

10.3.8

Was a signed direction to the financial institution or the signed electronic confirmation sent by the financial institution stored in such manner that it may be cross referenced to the withdrawal from the trust account as shown on the monthly statement from the financial institution?

N/A

Yes

No

OVERDRAFTS 10.6.1

At all times was a balance on deposit in trust which was sufficient to meet all obligations with respect to monies held in trust for each client?

Yes

No

10.6.2

In the case of errors in the trust account, were they corrected without delay?

N/A

Yes

No

10.6.3

Were all overdrafts in any trust account reported to the Executive Director within three-days?

N/A Yes No

of 96


EXECUTOR / PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE / ADMINISTRATOR

10.1.2 Did any lawyers of the firm act in a representative capacity as detailed in regulation

10.1.2?

In accordance with regulation 10.1.3, a lawyer is not required to deposit trust money or trust property received by a lawyer acting in a representative capacity into the lawyer’s or law firm’s trust account or record the trust money or trust property in the prescribed financial records of the lawyer's law firm, provided the following conditions are met.

N/A

Yes

No

10.1.3(a)

Did the lawyer maintains a record of all appointments or assumptions of a representative capacity and a list of the beneficiaries of the estate or trust together with their last known address?

N/A

Yes

No

10.1.3(b)

Were the books, records, accounts and documentation of the estate or trust are in a form sufficient to accommodate an examination, review, audit or investigation ordered by the Executive Director or Complaints Investigation Committee?

N/A

Yes

No

REQUIRED INFORMATION

1. In circumstances where s.30(5) of the Legal Profession Act applies, have you advised all affected clients that such funds can be held in a specific trust account with the interest credited to the client?

N/A Yes No

2. At the time of this review, is there an amount greater than $10,000 relating to a single transaction being held in any general trust account that has been there for more than 90 days?

Yes No

3. At the time of this review, have there been any balances in any general trust account held for more than one year, with no activity?

Yes No

If yes, Please provide a list of such balances.

Description $ Amount

4. Are you holding in trust any funds for which the purpose of the trust cannot be fulfilled and the trust funds cannot be distributed [see Public Trustee Act s.28(1)]?

Yes No

5. On the last reconciliation for the year, were there any stale dated cheques (i.e. outstanding for more than 6 months)? Yes No

If yes, what is the number and total dollar amount of these stale dated cheques? #__________ $___________

6. Do you make use of electronic deposits (i.e. cheque scanning, email transfers, incoming wire transfers, etc) for Trust Account transactions?

Yes No

7. Do you use electronic payment (withdrawals) methods (i.e. email transfer, wire transfer, on-line bill payment, etc.) for Trust Transactions?

8. Is this a FINAL Trust Account Report?

Yes No

If yes - I undertake to file a confirmation from my bank(s) that the trust account(s) is (are) closed and please provide a reason for final report (e.g. retiring, changing category, changing firm/employer) ______________________________.

Yes

Commented [SW8]: This is a new section, designed to ascertain whether lawyers are appropriately following the regulations with respect to personal representatives and help determine if there are any risk issues present.

Commented [SW9]: Previously we only asked for balances greater than $1,000. In order to get a more accurate sense of volume and assess risk, we are now asking for a complete list.

Commented [SW10]: Previously we only asked if there were stale dated cheques, in order to determine volume and help assess the risk, we are asking for number and dollar amount.

Commented [SW11]: Questions #6 & 7 We have received many questions about the appropriateness and the increased use of electronic banking as it relates to Trust Accounts. We are trying to determine how many lawyers are moving towards electronic banking to help inform if the regulations or requirements need to be revised

of 96


Trust Account Oversight Costs:

The Society wishes to gain an understanding of the total cost for the legal profession of Trust Account oversight. In order to aid in that data collection.

Please select the range for the total cost of the Accountant’s work (before HST) in relation to this Trust Account Report and the Accountant’s Report

$0 - $500 $501 - $1,000 $1,001 - $2,000 $2,001 -$3,000 $3,001 +

This report was completed by: ______________________________________________________________________________________________

The accountant’s work for preparation of the Accountant’s Report on the Trust Account Report is to be done pursuant to a written engagement dated

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________.

The name of the accountant engaged to complete the Accountant’s Report on the Trust Account is ________________________________________

Please provide email address and mailing address of the accountant noted above:

Email address:___________________________________________________________________________________

Mailing address:___________________________________________________________________________________

Phone number:___________________________

Commented [SW12]: We are trying to gain a better understanding of the complete cost of Trust Account oversight. As the oversight of Trust Accounts by the Society is reviewed this information help determine if there is a better model for the profession.

Commented [SW13]: Updating our records with complete address information

of 96

Filling the gaps a workshop on refugee lawThis workshop is a partnership between the Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society, Immigrant Services Association of Nova Scotia, Halifax Refugee Clinic, Atlantic Refugee and Immigrant Services and Refugee Sponsorship Support Program – Halifax section.

november 8, 2016, 11:00 am – 4:00 pm (lunch will be provided)

nova scotia Barristers’ society classroom Cogswell tower, 800–2000 Barrington street, halifax

You are invited to a Refugee Law Workshop at the Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society on Tuesday, November 8, 2016.

We have identified a number of gaps in the provision of legal services to immigrants and refugees in Nova Scotia. The purpose of this workshop is to begin to fill these gaps by increasing and developing expertise in refugee law and building a roster of trained lawyers who can offer pro bono or low bono services in these areas.

presenters:

• Julie Chamagne is the Executive Director of the Halifax Refugee Clinic – a pro bono clinic that offers legal services to immigrants and refugees in Nova Scotia. Julie will open the workshop with a discussion of the current gaps in legal services for immigrants and refugees.

• laura hamBleton is the Atlantic Trainer with the Private Refugee Sponsorship Program.

• elizaBeth Wozniak is a lawyer with North Star Immigration Law in Halifax.

Both Laura and Liz will be providing lawyers with the practical tools needed to assist this increasing population of newcomers.

rsVp: Kindly email [email protected] by Wednesday, october 26, 2016. Thank you!

of 96

- 1 -


From: Jane Willwerth, Officer, Strategy & Engagement


Subject: Submission to FLSC Access to Justice inventory

Date – Executive Committee N/A

Date – Council

A2J Stakeholder Committees/Assessing Legal Needs: The Nova Scotia legislature amended the Legal Profession Act in 2010 adding to the purpose clause to require the Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society to: seek to improve the administration of justice in the Province by (i) regularly consulting with organizations and communities in the Province having an interest in the NSBS' purpose, including, but not limited to, organizations and communities reflecting the economic, ethnic, racial, sexual and linguistic diversity of the Province, and (ii) engaging in such other relevant activities as approved by the Council (section (4)(d)). This amended purpose clause has resulted in the NSBS undertaking regular consultations concerning access to legal services with a specific focus on marginalized communities. The previous update sent to the FLSC in 2014 introduced #TalkJustice, our project that seeks to bring the public voice to the centre of our efforts to improve the administration of justice. In 2016, the Nova Scotia Access to Justice Coordinating Committee tasked the Society’s Equity & Access Office with developing its own community engagement program. This partnership provides new energy, expertise and resources to #TalkJustice, and it will continue to be our most effective way of advocating for enhanced access to legal services and to the justice system for equity-seeking and economically disadvantaged Nova Scotians. Working with partners in government will require us to generate more robust statistical data from our community engagement work. To this end, the Equity & Access Office plans to use SenseMaker, a research software designed to gather large numbers of stories and present them in such a way that can reveal otherwise hidden patterns and relationships. Critically, it is a system that “puts the public first”: participants tell stories in their own words, and provide them with the tools necessary to explain their

of 96

- 2 -

story’s meaning. This removes the chance that the researcher’s unconscious biases change the context of a participant’s story. SenseMaker’s output it statistical data. This means that it is able to take stories, a highly qualitative research method, and from them create the quantitative data that is often required to begin systems-level change. Self-Help Services: Since the last update, the Society hosted a workshop by Dr. Julie MacFarlane of the National Self-Represented Litigants Project. This workshop was based on her most up-to-date research on how to deliver effective unbundled legal services to self represented litigants. In particular, she highlighted a coaching model that she has recently designed that is beneficial to both lawyers and self represented litigants. Public Legal Education and Information: The Society continues to support NSFamilyLaw.ca. The site was created and launched in cooperation with the Nova Scotia Department of Justice, the judiciary, the Legal Information Society of Nova Scotia, Nova Scotia Legal Aid, the Nova Scotia Department of Community Services, the Canadian Bar Association - Nova Scotia, and the Halifax Capital District Health Authority-Mental Health Program. The site is called Family Law Nova Scotia and it offers the public comprehensive legal information including the services available for family law and help navigating the institutional process relating to family law issues in the province. The goal of the website is to help the public understand family law issues and provide tools to navigate the available options to solve their family law problem. The Society has also worked to support the provision of legal information to African Nova Scotian communities about land title clarification, working with the Legal Information Society of Nova Scotia and community leaders to create and distribute information brochures on land title, taxation and wills and estates. Advice from Non-Lawyers/ Alternative business structures for legal service delivery/ Limited Scope Retainers/Unbundled Legal Services/ Alternative Billing Models/Reduced Fees (Pro Bono and Low Bono): The Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society is building a new model of regulating legal services, in a manner that is risk-focused, proactive, principled and proportionate. The new approach is designed to be more responsive to a diverse and profoundly changing environment, to enhance the quality of legal services, to encourage ethical legal practice, to foster innovation in legal services and to increase access to justice. In the course of this work, the Society has adopted a new policy framework that includes the following:

Legal services may be delivered by lawyers and legal entities regulated by the Society or by defined classes of approved legal services providers.

Council will have the authority to allow specific organizations or individuals to provide limited scope legal services;

Legal services may be delivered by legal entities in combination with other services, so long as all delivered services are subject to the same ethical and professional standards as are required of the legal services;

The Code of Professional Conduct will be amended to eliminate barriers to fee sharing with non-lawyers; and

Retired lawyers may be permitted to offer limited scope services under a new category of membership.

of 96

- 3 -

Summary Advice, Brief Services and Referrals/Legal Aid: The Society provides support to Nova Scotia Legal Aid’s summary advice clinics for individuals from historically disadvantaged communities. This support work has included, for example, the creation of an information pamphlet to support the legal aid lawyers providing summary advice. The Society also continues to assist with the Supreme Court’s Free Legal Clinic, an initiative of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court to provide pro bono summary advice to people in the courthouse. Supply Side Issues (Small and Sole Practitioners, Rural and Remote Areas, Cultural and Linguistic Barriers) The Society has launched a resource portal for lawyers and law firms seeking guidance on issues of employment equity and cultural competence. The portal gathers valuable online toolkits, training and information materials created by the Equity & Access Office, and relevant items from the Barristers’ Library. Included on the Portal is the Equity & Access Office’s cultural competence video series, produced and launched this year. The Office has received increasing demand for cultural competence instruction, particularly from lawyers who live outside of HRM. These short videos cover a wide range of cultural competence topics, both general (“Why Cultural Competency?”) and specific (“Trauma-Informed Lawyering for Sexual Assault Victims”). The Society is also a leading provider of cultural competence instruction to Nova Scotia’s legal profession. This included annual instruction provided in the Skills Course for article clerks, to incoming students at the Schulich School of Law, and at the Society’s Annual Meeting.

of 96


From: Victoria Rees, Director of Professional Responsibility


Subject: National Discipline Standards - amendments

For: Approval X

Introduction

Information

Recommendation/Motion: That Council approves the amendments to the National Discipline Standards and the Implementation Guide, which were approved by Council of the Federation of Law Societies in June 2016 Executive Summary: Council approved adoption of the National Discipline Standards for the NSBS in 2014. The Professional Responsibility Department provides semi-annual reports to Council measuring our progress toward achieving these standards. A Federation Standing Committee on National Discipline Standards was created to monitor implementation of the standards by all jurisdictions, to offer guidance and assistance to jurisdictions where the standards are not being achieved, and to modify and develop new standards when appropriate. I serve on this committee. As a result of feedback received from various jurisdictions in the past two years following implementation of these standards, the Standing Committee recommended amendments to both the Standards and the Implementation Guide, which amendments were approved by the Federation’s Council in June 2016. In accordance with the process adopted in 2014, the NSBS Council is being asked to approve the amendments for adoption in NS. Recommendation/Motion: That Council approves the amendments to the National Discipline Standards and the Implementation Guide, which were approved by Council of the Federation of Law Societies in June 2016 Analysis:

The NSBS was the first and only jurisdiction in Canada, until recently, to implement and achieve all 21 National Discipline Standards. For a period of time earlier this year, we did not

of 96

meet Standards 1 and 2 due to staff vacations/illness. This is inevitable within a small office with relatively few staff. All jurisdictions have made progress toward achieving these standards. Some must await legislative amendments in order to engage in the sharing of information, or appoint public representatives to regulatory committees, as recommended. Others face challenges with timeliness of their investigations and hearings processes due to volume, and the use of volunteers. However, significant progress has been made nation-wide, despite the great variation in size and membership. The current proposed amendments to the Standards relate to #3 - timeline to resolve or refer complaint. This speaks to the need for timeliness in dismissing and resolving complaints, or investigating and referring complaints on to the CIC or its equivalent. The new substandards 3(b) and (c) take into account those jurisdictions like ours which have a process for staff dismissal and subsequent review or appeal of such decisions, and the impact this has on timelines. The Implementation Guide has been amended at pages 3-4 to provide guidance with respect to the new standards above. Further changes under development As part of our ongoing commitment to ensure these Standards are current, relevant and feasible for all jurisdictions, the Standing Committee meets in person twice yearly to discuss progress by each jurisdiction, challenges, ways to support each other in achieving the standards, and ideas for development of new standards. To this end, the following are topics under active development: 1. There is tremendous public interest in levelling the playing field and raising the bar on regulatory excellence with complaints handling across the country. We are therefore developing a peer support process whereby provinces in need of guidance or advice in achieving the standards have access to peers who can offer such assistance. This may include small teams offering on site guidance; 2. We plan to advance qualitative standards in addition to those currently focused on transparency, efficiency and timeliness. This includes new standards for early complaints resolution (some jurisdictions do not authorize staff dismissals), and respecting interim public interest measures such as suspensions and practice restrictions (some provinces have no authority to interim suspend a lawyer in urgent cases). 3. Barriers remain among some provinces to share information pursuant to Standard 16 respecting complaint investigations involving members of more than one jurisdiction. A survey is currently being conducted to track progress in this area, which is a priority given the number of lawyers who are members in multiple provinces. 4. To advance Standard 20, a separate Working Group of which I am past chair and a continuing member is focusing on developing a national curriculum for training volunteer adjudicators. This process has involved identifying the skills, competencies, apptitudes and attitudes needed to serve on the Hearing Committee, based on current research, case law and best practices, and

of 96

articulating the subsets of areas for training as well as training methods. A number of jurisdictions offer little or no training, and/or have no budget for it. Our goal is to develop the curriculum outline, and hopefully work with the Federation to develop training modules able to be accessed in a variety of ways (including on line) by all jurisdictions including those in remote areas with little budget.

Exhibits/Appendices: 1. National Discipline Standards – approved by FLS June 2016 2. National Discipline Standards Implementation Guide – revised and approved October 2016 3. Chart tracking NSBS progress toward achieving the standards 4. FLS Communication regarding the purpose and status of implementation of the standards across

Canada

of 96

National Discipline Standards Project

Status Update: January 2016 to August 2016

Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society

STANDARD

CURRENT STATUS

COMMENTS/

ISSUES WITH STANDARD

Timeliness 1. Telephone inquiries:

75% of telephone inquiries are acknowledged within one business day and 100% within two business days.

MET - 97% of telephone inquiries are acknowledged within one business day.

3.15% (11) of calls were returned in 3 days .29% (1) of calls were returned in 4 days Factoring in Easter Holidays

2. Written complaints: 100% of written complaints are acknowledged in writing within three business days.

NOT MET – 94% of written complaints

are acknowledged within three business days.

6.02% (5) written complaints were acknowledged within 4 days. Factoring in staff vacation (3 files). 2 files needed review, member filed complaint against other members.

3. Timeline to resolve or refer complaint: 80% of all complaints are resolved or referred for a disciplinary or remedial response within 12 months. 90% of all complaints are resolved or referred for a disciplinary or remedial response within 18 months.

MET

96% of complaints were resolved or referred for a disciplinary or remedial response within 12 months. 98% of complaints were resolved or referred for a disciplinary or remedial response within 18 months. 2 members were monitored for 2 years.

4. Contact with complainant: For 90% of open complaints there is contact with the complainant at least once every 90 days during the

MET

Our own internal timeline is to communicate with both parties every 30 days. 96% of files have contact with

of 96

STANDARD

CURRENT STATUS

COMMENTS/


investigation stage. complainant at least every 90 days. 5. Contact with lawyer or Québec notary:

For 90% of open complaints there is contact with the lawyer or Québec notary at least once every 90 days during the investigation stage.

MET

Our own internal timeline is to communicate with both parties every 30 days. 97% of files have contact with members at least every 90 days.

Hearings 6. 75% of citations or notices of hearings

are issued and served upon the lawyer or Québec notary within 60 days of authorization. 95% of citations or notices of hearings are issued and served upon the lawyer or Québec notary within 90 days of authorization.

MET

Only one matter referred to hearing and commenced in this period

7. 75% of all hearings commence within 9 months of authorization. 90% of all hearings commence within 12 months of authorization.

MET

Case management rules are set out in our regulations

8. Reasons for 90% of all decisions are rendered within 90 days from the last date the panel receives submissions.

MET

Panels are required to adhere to timelines for release of decisions on merit and penalty, pursuant to our regulations

9. Each law society will report annually to its governing body on the status of the standards.

MET

of 96

STANDARD

CURRENT STATUS

COMMENTS/


Public Participation 10. There is public participation at every

stage of discipline; i.e. on all hearing panels of three or more; at least one public representative; on the charging committee, at least one public representative.

MET

public reps serve on the Complaints Investigation Ctte., the Complaints Review Ctte. and the Hearing Ctte.as well as all hearing panels

11. There is a complaints review process in which there is public participation for complaints that are disposed of without going to a charging committee.

MET

A public rep chairs the Complaints Review Ctte.

Transparency 12. Hearings are open to the public.

MET

13. Reasons are provided for any decision to close hearings.

MET

14. Notices of charge or citation are published promptly after a date for the hearing has been set.

MET

Notice of Referral to Hearing requirements set out in our regulations

15. Notices of hearing dates are published at least 60 days prior to the hearing, or such shorter time as the pre-hearing process permits.

MET

Notice of Hearing requirements set out in our regulations

16. There is an ability to share information about a lawyer or Québec notary who is a member of another law society with that other law society when an investigation is underway in a manner that protects solicitor-client privilege, or there is an obligation on the lawyer or Québec notary to disclose to all law

MET

Set out in the Legal Profession Act and regulations

of 96

STANDARD

CURRENT STATUS

COMMENTS/


societies of which he/she is a member that there is an investigation underway.

17. There is an ability to report to police about criminal activity in a manner that protects solicitor/client privilege.

MET

Process set out in our Act, regulations and by policy

Accessibility 18. A complaint help form is available to

complainants.

MET

19. There is a directory available with status information on each lawyer or Québec notary, including easily accessible information on discipline history.

MET

Qualification of Adjudicators and Volunteers 20. There is ongoing mandatory training for

all adjudicators, including training on decision writing, with refresher training no less often than once a year and the curriculum for mandatory training will comply with the national curriculum if and when it is available.

MET

Cultural competency April 2016 Hearing Ctte Vice-Chair attended five hour cultural competency training in January 2016

21. There is mandatory orientation for all volunteers involved in conducting investigations or in the charging process to ensure that they are equipped with the knowledge and skills to do the job.

MET

Half day orientation and training provided in July 2016 CIC Chair attended five hour cultural competency training in January 2016

of 96

YTD YTD YTD Actual vs YTD YTD Actual vs Full Year Forecast vs OV/UNBudget Actual YTD Budget Last Year Last YTD Actual Budget Forecast Actual % Note:

RevenueFees Revenue 1,744,024 1,766,109 22,085 1,643,082 123,027 4,228,619 4,259,793 31,174 0.7% 1Education & Credentials 160,782 194,990 34,208 159,026 35,964 422,325 530,547 108,222 25.6% 2Law Stamps 52,250 66,850 14,600 56,800 10,050 125,400 130,988 5,588 4.5%Library Revenue 1,541 3,034 1,493 1,123 1,911 3,700 4,020 320 8.6%Communications 6,800 6,205 (595) 7,130 (925) 13,600 13,005 (595) (4.4%)Interest/Investment 25,000 48,336 23,336 (18,720) 67,056 60,000 78,513 18,513 30.9% 3Management Fee 20,833 20,833 0 20,833 - 50,000 50,000 - 0.0%Other 207 91 (116) 956 (865) 500 7,000 6,500 1300.0%

Total Revenue 2,011,437 2,106,448 95,011 1,870,230 236,218 4,904,144 5,073,865 169,721 3.5%

ExpensesProfessional Responsibility 618,611 851,066 (232,455) 565,867 (285,199) 1,474,744 1,831,618 (356,874) (24.2%) 4Education & Credentials 302,474 294,091 8,383 276,592 (17,499) 711,892 705,538 6,354 0.9%Administration & Operating 517,729 511,418 6,311 495,185 (16,234) 1,255,345 1,294,112 (38,767) (3.1%) 5Library 240,593 223,270 17,323 222,113 (1,157) 573,896 571,719 2,177 0.4%Communications 81,174 80,384 790 71,683 (8,701) 202,430 197,551 4,879 2.4%Governance and Regulatory 138,788 227,481 (88,693) 127,750 (99,732) 317,293 338,259 (20,966) (6.6%) 6Equity and Access to Justice 109,168 107,872 1,296 102,124 (5,747) 246,906 260,075 (13,169) (5.3%) 7Legal Services Regulation 73,030 74,133 (1,103) 23,938 (50,195) 173,753 173,666 87 0.0%Programs and Other Expenses 118,631 121,036 (2,405) 125,598 4,562 284,713 286,435 (1,722) (0.6%)

Total Expenses 2,200,198 2,490,751 (290,553) 2,010,849 (479,902) 5,240,972 5,658,974 (418,002) (8.0%)

Net Contribution to Surplus (Deficit) (188,761) (384,303) (195,542) (140,619) (243,684) (336,828) (585,109) (248,281) (73.7%)

YTD YTD YTD Actual vs YTD YTD Actual vs Full Year Forecast vs OV/UNBudget Actual YTD Budget Last Year Last YTD Actual Budget Forecast Actual %

LFCC Revenue 24,125 40,243 16,118 (33,732) 73,975 57,900 62,143 4,243 7.3%

LFCC Expenses 85,183 19,262 65,921 75,864 56,603 204,440 91,738 112,702 0.0%

Net Contribution To Surplus (61,058) 20,981 82,039 (109,596) 130,578 (146,540) (29,594) 116,946 (79.8%)

Consolidated Net Contribution toSurplus (Deficit) (249,819) (363,321) (113,502) (250,215) (113,106) (483,368) (614,704) (131,336) 27.2%

Notes:1. The number of Practising lawyers at the beginning of the fee year was slightly higher than budgeted, resulting in a slight projected surplus in Fees revenue2. There are approximately 25% more students registered for the Skills Course than originally budgeted resulting in a projected surplus in Education revenue3. The Society had to sell some investments at the beginning of the year to support cash flow thus resulting in a reduced balance available which to receive interest on.4. The number of scheduled Professional Responsibility Formal Hearing days has significantly exceeded the number budgeted, Therefore, there is a projected deficit forecasted

for such areas as Professional and Legal fees in this area.5. Projected recruitment and increased benefit costs for all staff are creating a pressure for the Administration of the Society6. Payments resulting from the TWU ruling have created a projected deficit above what was budgeted7. Temporary part time staff have contracted to help the E&A office move forward with initiatives to support the work in this area in the updated Strategic Framework.

FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 2016-08-31

2016-08-31NOVA SCOTIA BARRISTERS' SOCIETY - GENERAL FUND

BUDGET COMPARISON STATEMENTFOR THE PERIOD ENDING 2016-08-31

NOVA SCOTIA BARRISTERS' SOCIETY - LAWYERS' FUND FOR CLIENT COMPENSATION (LFCC)BUDGET COMPARISON STATEMENT

of 96

NOVA SCOTIA BARRISTERS SOCIETYForecasted results for the fiscal year 2016/17 based on September 30, 2016 Financial Results

Preface

Unless otherwise explained the forecast projected amounts are taken as straight-line projections based on year to date results at the time of the Financial Statements. Please see the "Rationale Column" for description of method chosen.

The Finance Committee's Mandate refers to Management providing satisfactory explanations for all forecast variances that are greater than 5 percent (%) of budget or greater than $10,000 of budget In order to assist with the usefulness of the financial statements, color coding has been added to year end forecasted variance amounts. The items not coloured are considered “OK” within a 5% variance or an immaterial dollar amount threshold.

Green is savings/revenue projected better than budget, Red is expenses/revenue overage projected when compared to budget, Yellow are items to that have potential to fluctuate and will be monitored and are normally within 5% of budget.

SummaryYear to Forecast

The Society has budgeted for a Deficit (transfer from Reserves to cover) of $338,038 for fiscal year 2016/17. Date Apr-17Based on the year-end financial figures for 16/17 at the end of September 2016 the Forecasted Operating deficit compared to Budget is (195,542)$ (248,281)$ and an overall Forecasted Operating Deficit calculated as Revenues less Expenses of: (384,303)$ (585,109)$

*Found on bottom of IS7Revenues Year to Date Forecasted Year End Variances

Membership Fee Revenue Practising Fees 21,877 34,516 The number of Practising lawyers is currently projected to be about 10 above the number budgeted

for the remainder of the fiscal year based on the September lawyer count. Down approx 5 from previous estimate

Non-Practising Fees (2,277) (8,227) The number of Non-practising members has decreased by thirty since the beginning of the fee yearsome have moved to Practising while most have resigned or retired.

Incorporation (and LLP) 2,450 2,450 The number of fees paid for renewals for 2015/16 was higher than budgeted.the volume has increased over the past few years

Interest Income (7,756) (12,580) The Society had to sell some investments at the beginning of the year to support cash flowthus resulting in a reduced balance available which to receive interest on.

Gain on Investment Sales 24,983 24,983 The Society has had to sell some investments at the beginning of the year to support cash flowthus resulting in a modest gain on the sale of investments

Sundry Revenue (116) 6,500 Projected based on previous year's results and success on receiving reimbursements of fees

Education & Credentialing Revenue

Articling 5,616 5,375 In these three areas there have been higher number of new Calls to BAR, applications and transfers in Application Fees 2,875 2,300 and requests for credentialling rulings and letters compared to what was expected in the budget. Other Credentialling Fees 2,547 2,547 The forecast includes a conservative estimate for the remainder of the fiscal year.

Tuition Fees (14,750) 67,500 At the end of July there were 18 more students registered for the Skills Course than originallybudgeted for. Costs will increase slightly to accommodate the students, but revenues areanticipated to be up significantly.

of 96


Professional Responsibility Department ExpensesExpenses Year to Date Forecasted Year End Variances

P.R. Support Legal Fees/Professional Services 16,115 - Professional Responsibility Expenses with respect to support expenses have been cautiously

9,961 - forecasted to Budgeted figures. These types of expenses tend to fluctuate greatly in the fall and winter as year end approaches and will be monitored very closely.

Investigation Expenses Lawyers' Services/Legal Fees (2,472) - For these Investigation expenses - due to the unpredictability and nature of the costs they Professional Services (3,958) (9,499) are currently being forecasted to equal budget by the end of the fiscal year. Theyare constantly Practise Investigations 16,708 - being monitored throughout the year. Professional services have increased recently Forensic Financial Audits 4,167 - and are forecasted to be over budget. Receiver and Custodian Fees 21,192 - Trust Audit 27,215 12,000 In order to reduce costs, the number of Trust Audits will be reduced pending any special

circumstances that arise.

Fitness to Practise Expenses Professional Services 3,513 - Forecasted to be on budget - these expnses tend to be unpredictable

Prosecution & Hearing Expenses

Committee Expenses (41,041) (50,700) The budget for 2016/17 included Hearing Costs based on the estimated number of daysFacilities Rentals (14,515) (55,109) that were expected to occur. Since then the estimated number of days required has doubled.Lawyers' Services/Legal fees (239,330) (215,622) In addition, the hearings have been moved offsite due to space requirements (Skills Course, etc.)Professional Services (36,839) (34,915) which has resulted in additional space and support rental costs. The Hearing costs include

panel costs and honoraria and with the increased complexity and costs of hearings thecost per day has increased

Receiver and Custodian Fees 5,408 2,980 These have been cautiously forecasted to be under budget and will be watched very closely.

Education & Credentialing Department Expenses Expenses Year to Date Forecasted Year End Variances

Admissions Expenses 3,576 4,175 Two year average has been used to forecast these expenses, as the Skills courseswrap up in the next couple of months the expenses will become more clear.

LRA Education & Assessment (3,250) - Expenses are forecasted to agree to budget by fiscal year end.

Receiver, Custodian, Wind-Up Assistance

of 96


General Operating ExpensesExpenses Year to Date Forecasted Year End Variances

Accounting & Audit - (2,800) Reflects timing of audit payment from prior year and administrative audit costs

Telephone and Internet 643 (2,900) Reflects increased repair and system improvement costs

Provision for Doubtful Accounts (3,599) (3,599) Estimate for any uncollectible accounts - small amount for 16/17.

External Computer Support (2,099) (2,500) Finalization of implementing the Society's new IT Infrastructure project. Slightlylonger project than originally anticipated.

Professional Services 1,433 (7,825) Additional professional support for Human Resource and Organizational process development

Staff Benefits (747) (6,708) Updated rates have been received from insurance provider - large than budgeted

Recruitment Fees (7,664) (15,328) Costs associated with the recruitment of an HR position for the Society

Library and Information Services ExpensesExpenses Year to Date Forecasted Year End Variances

Subscriptions & Books 17,624 3,005 Costs are estimated on a two year average and are based on contract pricing and purchases

CANLll Expenses (3,995) (4,949) Costs based on previous year - will be monitored throughout the year

CommunicationsExpenses Year to Date Forecasted Year End Variances

Printing (6,030) - Timing of the printing of Society Record will be monitored to ensure costs are managed in the correct period and timing is accurate

Website 3,509 5,500 Projected upgrades to Website may have to be delayed as work on other IT areas is implemented.

Governance ExpensesExpenses Year to Date Forecasted Year End Variances

Council and Committee Meetings (17,789) (5,000) Timing of Committee and Council meetings YTD, forecasted to be above budget

Trinity Western University (28,757) (10,340) Legal Fees associated with the Appeal of the Trinity Western rulings.

Annual Meeting 9,206 10,000 Costs for the Annual Meeting were lower than budgeted, due to scaled down event, speakers, etc.

of 96


Regulatory ProgramsExpenses Year to Date Forecasted Year End Variances

LRA Audit 1,139 (6,900) Forecast based on two previous years, have seen an increase in number of requested audits.

Equity and Access Expenses

Salaries and Benefits (125) (10,000) Part time staff member hired to assist with Equity & Access work relating to a portion of the newStrategic Framework

Legal Services RegulationLegal Services Regulation (1,103) 87 Costs for the Legal Services Regulation work is expected to be very close to budget

Other Program Expenses

Lawyers' Assistance (17,061) (14,600) The annual "Usage" reconciliation fee was more than $22K, the budget was for $6K, there was a large increase in the LAP services received in 2015/16.

Other

Unrealized Gain(Loss) on 6,109 6,109 The investment portfolio has not performed well recently, this represents the YTD devaluationInvestments of the portfolio. Has increased slightly in August.

NON-OPERATING -COST ANALYSIS - LFCCLawyers Fund for Client CompensationRevenues and Expenses Year to Date Forecasted Year End Variances

Interest Income (8,482) (20,357) The Society had to sell some investments at the beginning of the year to support cash flowGain on Investment Sales 23,894 26,811 thus resulting in a modest gain on the sale of investments, but less funds in which to earn interest on

CLIA Premium 32,333 77,596 Annual fee lower than budgeted, credit received as part of fee per lawyer received from CLIA

Unrealized Gain(Loss) on 24,600 24,600 The investment portfolio has not performed well recently, this represents the YTD devaluationInvestments of the portfolio.

of 96

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 2016

JULY Arrange for officers to meet with AG & key liaison activities Recognition reception - schedule

AUGUST Relationships - start to organize County Bar visitsSet meetings with CBA, NSLA, PPS, DoJ (NS) Legal Services, County Bars, Large Firms, LRC, Law Foundation, LISNS

SEPTEMBER

OCTOBER Invite Minister to address Council in January Notices re election processCouncil and 2nd VP FLSC Conference Recognition reception Oct. 28

NOVEMBER

DECEMBER

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 2016 JULY

AUGUST

Review legislation work 2016-17 Activity Plan 1st draft

SEPTEMBER Engagement Activities review Committee work plans

OCTOBEREngagement Activities Preliminary Report on LSR Pilot Project Regulatory Risk - Review

NOVEMBER Engagement Activities Enterprise Risk Management – Compliance Reporting – proposal from ED

DECEMBER Engagement Activities

COUNCIL 2016 *Matters in italics are reports from the ED

JULY Council Education: Council Policies Review: Overview of Council role Strategic Framework - Approval 2016-17 Activity Plan – Monitoring Report – Library & Information Services A2J Business Plan

AUGUST No meeting

SEPTEMBERCouncil Policies Review: 7, 10, 12-15 Council Education: Report – LIANS overview and update Report - 2016 ALR Committee Work plans – review for content and alignment with strategic framework Legal Services Regulation - Legislation FLSC President to visit

OCTOBER Legal Services Regulation – Legislation – Pkg. 1 and 2 Delivery of liability claims program Recognition reception

NOVEMBER

Legal Services Regulation - Legislation – final package Compliance Reporting - approval Monitoring Report – Equity and A2J Workshop on leading the next phase of change

DECEMBER No meeting

of 96

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 2017

JANUARY Prepare for Council & 2nd VP elections

FEBRUARY Budget preparation ED Performance Review

MARCH Introduce budget Councill District & 2nd VPelection if required

APRILAt-large elections Staff evaluations including Directors Begin Annual Report prep C’tee Report prep for May Council Annual Lawyer Report

MAY Audit Directors’ evaluations Annual Report & Annual meeting Fee invoicing and collection DSA selection

JUNE Annual meeting Fee collection Main Call to Bar

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 2017 JANUARY

FEBRUARY

MARCH Budget Introduction Entity Regulation – Plan for Pilot project and MSELP Report on LSR Pilot Project

APRIL

MAY

JUNE

COUNCIL 2017 * Matters in italics are reports from the ED

JANUARY Monitoring Report Communications & Engagement, Credentials

FEBRUARYMin of Justice to address Council Committee Mid-year reports Monitoring Report – Finance & Admin.,

MARCH Budget Introduction Legal Services Reg – Report on LSR Pilot Project Elections- Consider gaps before at-large election

APRILMonitoring Report - Equity and Access Office Budget - Approval Annual Lawyer Report - Approve Council Evaluation Strategic Planning – Review of plan

MAY Monitoring Report - Professional Responsibility Distinguished Service Award Committee reports - on work plans

JUNE Annual Meeting – June 17, 2017 Begin to update Strategic Framework Strategic Planning - workshop

of 96

1

ACTIVITY PLAN 2016-2017

INTRODUCTION The Activity Plan for 2016-2017 outlines those activities that Council has mandated to address the initiatives approved in the Strategic Framework. Council will also monitor certain activities that are assigned to the Executive Director. Council Committees will carry on with their work in accordance with their Terms of Reference and work plans that will be approved by Council.

STRATEGIC DIRECTION 1 — EXCELLENCE IN REGULATION AND GOVERNANCE

PRIORITY 1: TRANSFORM REGULATION AND GOVERNANCE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST ACTIVITY 1.1 IMPLEMENT THE PILOT PROJECT AND ADJUST AS NECESSARY Implement and evaluate the pilot project for risk-based entity regulation including the self-assessment tool for the Management System for Ethical Legal Practice (MSELP) Develop following consultation an MSELP for legal entities employing lawyers in corporations and government Outcome: A tested model for entity regulation for the profession with a plan for implementation Responsibility – ED (with assistance of independent evaluators), WGs (In-house and SSF) and Council

Work Plan

July / August— finalize project plan; evaluation strategy developed; LSS position filled; SAT technology support developed; volunteers identified; SAT resource curation continues September —Pilot communications drafted; SAT rollout and consultations begin; LSS liaison and education underway October — same November — same January — SAT testing completed February — preliminary report with recommendations to Council March — outcomes measurement and budget development; revisions to SAT and process April — final Pilot Project report to Council May —

Status July / August — done September — underway October — Requests to participate in Pilot have been sent; evaluation process being refined; on track November — First group of meetings held; taking more time to arrange than anticipated; generally welcome response once there is an understanding; resource materials almost complete January — February — March — April — May —

of 96

2

ACTIVITY 1.2 IMPLEMENT THE REGULATORY OBJECTIVES AND TRIPLE-P APPROACHES

Expand, implement, document and evaluate Triple-P approaches to regulation, as required by RO 6. This will include implementing the regulatory risk matrix in conjunction with AP 1.4 and a review of all regulations and professional standards to ensure they are Triple-P compliant. Outcome: A demonstrated approach to proactive, principled and proportionate regulation that applies to all areas of the Society’s work Responsibility – ED, Dir. PR, Dir. E&C, Senior Staff, Council, PRPPC

Work Plan

August — develop more risk-focused Rounds meetings September — review Risk Index with Snr. Mngt. and Rounds; continue PRPPC Triple-P work; development of platform to collect risk data October — finalize Risk Index and map out risk responses; staff workshop on embedding Triple-P and risk; testing of platform for risk data; begin outcomes measurement work with external support November — PRPPC considers restorative justice approaches in PR; Hearing Ctte training; continue outcomes measurement development; phased in use of risk data platform January — PRPPC work continues; February — consider results of prelim. Pilot Project report and recommendations; finalize outcomes measurement framework March — April — May —

Status August — underway September — October — We continue to identify, document and evaluate all aspects of regulation where Triple P applies. Staff training ongoing. New ‘Rounds’ process being refined to give effect to Triple P November — ‘Regulatory & Risk Bulletin’ created for staff to ensure widespread knowledge of key info; several new processes being developed in PR – firm mentoring, early intervention, changes on intake January — February — March — April — May —

ACTIVITY 1.3 – AMENDMENTS TO THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT

Develop, have Council approve and submit to government amendments to the LPA to implement the Policy Framework for the Legal Services Regulation initiative as well as miscellaneous amendments.

Outcome: LSR is implemented through amendments to the LPA and other amendments are made Responsibility – ED, PR Counsel, LSRL&RWG, Council

Work Plan

July — obtain policy direction from Council re scope of legal services and LIANS structure; developing LPA amendments September — confirm Council policy direction; draft LPA amendments - October — introduce draft LPA amendments to Council November — draft LPA amendments to Council for approval December — proposed LPA amendments to government February — March —

Status July — done September — October — Three packages in development – the first deals with the LSR initiative (purpose of Society, delivery of legal services) and should be approved in October; the second deals with Council and Pt III of the LPA and will be introduced in October; the third will deal with a small number of matters that do not involve significant policy consideration, such as law corps and some changes re the Law Foundation. They should be able to be approved in November

of 96

3

April — May —

November — Initial meeting with DoJ and provided them with draft ; final submission will be on Nov 25; Gov’t timing may not see intro of legis. until fall of 2017 January — February — March — April — May —

ACTIVITY 1.4 RISK MANAGEMENT Prepare for Council approval a risk management policy that addresses all aspects of enterprise and regulatory risks for the Society Outcome: An appropriate comprehensive risk management policy is adopted Responsibility – ED, Dir. Fin & Admin, Dir. PR, Finance Committee, Council

Work Plan

July — September — review and revise Risk Index(es) October — develop and document risk responses; train staff November — complete development of risk data platform including mitigation scenarios and cost benefit January — build implementation plan for mitigations February — monitor status March —monitor status April — report to Council May — report to Council

Status July — September — October — Sen staff and Finance C’tee are advancing their work in this area. Risk is becoming a factor used every day in regulatory and operational decision making November — next work will await arrival of new Insurance Director January — February — March — April — May —

ACTIVITY 1.5 SUCCESSION PLANNING Consider what policies and regulations should be developed and adopted, from a Triple-P perspective, to ensure there is an effective/mandatory succession planning requirement in place for all lawyers Outcome: A set of principled and proportionate policies and regulations that ensure effective succession planning for all lawyers Responsibility – Council, WG of Council, PR Counsel

Work Plan July — September — October —Executive will consider in detail and bring matter to Council with recommendations November — January — February — March — April — May —

Status July — September — October — Task Force to be created November — ToR and appointments on Nov. Council agenda January — February — March — April — May —

ACTIVITY 1.6 MODERNIZE TRUST ACCOUNT REQUIREMENTS Work Plan Status

of 96

4

Working with CLIA and its members, consider appropriate requirements for trust accounts that reflect the risks associated with legal entities holding money in trust, changing banking, electronic commerce and documentation among other areas Outcome: Revised trust account regulations that reflect Triple-P approaches Responsibility - ED, Dir. PR, Council, WG, CLIA CEO/C’tee

July — assess resources for this initiative September — CLIA national trust accounts research begins; complete revision of new risk-focused trust account assessment October — implement new trust accounts assessment; trust accounts project underway; November — trust accounts project continues; further embed risk-focus in all aspects of trust accounts review program January — February — March — April — May —

July — done September — October — On hold pending some work to be done by CLIA November — CLIA work ongoing with consultant retained to assist with project; V Rees is involved on our behalf January — February — March — April — May —

ACTIVITY 1.7 COUNCIL COMPOSITION

Consider issues of how Council is selected including evaluating elections, appointments, statutory positions Outcome: A report that addresses these issues and provides options for Council Responsibility – GNC, Council

Work Plan July — September —GNC to identify scope of work October —GNC to consider statutory positions, number of public reps and authority to appoint Council members and advise Council November —GNC to follow-up on Council discussion if necessary January — February —GNC to consider what process to be undertaken if appointments of lawyers to Council is to be considered. March — April — May —

Status July — September — October — On work plan for GNC November — No change January — February — March — April — May —

ACTIVITY 1.8 CODE OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

Complete review and analysis of Code of professional Conduct to ensure that it applies to the scope of regulation embodied in Legal Services Regulation Outcome: A report on the scope of changes that may be required to address law firm and legal entity regulation and paralegal regulation Responsibility – CPCC, PR Counsel, Council

Work Plan July — September — October — November — January — February — March — April —

Status July — September — October — Included in CPCC work plan November — No change January — February — March — April —

of 96

5

May —

May —

STRATEGIC DIRECTION 2 ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

PRIORITY 2: ENHANCE ACCESS TO LEGAL SERVICES AND THE JUSTICE SYSTEM ACTIVITY 2.1 PROMOTE INCREASED ACCESS TO LEGAL SERVICES THROUGH REGULATORY STRATEGIC INITIATIVES AND MONITOR THEIR IMPACT Through new approaches to regulation of legal services the Society extends opportunities for the provision of legal services and encourages legal entities to expand their offerings Outcome: Benchmarks are created from which change in the availability of legal services can be measured Responsibility – ED, Exec., Council (with support of government)

Work Plan July — September — review as part of Pilot Project October — November — January — February — use Pilot Project info to develop/enhance outcomes measurement criteria March — April — May —

Status July — September — October — This work awaits discussions during the Pilot November — Some initial discussions happening to scope possibilities January — February — March — April — May —

ACTIVITY 2.2 PROMOTE SUBSTANTIVE EQUALITY AND FREEDOM FROM DISCRIMINATION IN THE DELIVERY OF LEGAL SERVICES AND THE JUSTICE SYSTEM Support lawyers in their efforts to meet obligations related to Regulatory Objective #5: to “promote diversity, inclusion, substantive equality and freedom from discrimination in the delivery of legal services and the justice system” Outcome: Create benchmarks of current status and measurable indicators for changes that advance compliance with RO#5 Responsibility – ER Pilot Project, E&A Office, Dir. F&A

Work Plan July — Pride reception & education; Pride parade; maintenance of Equity Portal and inclusion of new section on trauma; education sessions on ITL Observership Program; Ku’taw’tinu articling initiative work ongoing September — REC/GEC brainstorm for work plan on how to address creation of benchmarks for legal profession that advance compliance with Regulatory Objective 5. October — E&A Office work collaboratively with ER pilot project on how to meet RO5.

Status July — September — October — Initiatives being identified and developed by REC and GEC November — Ongoing January — February — March — April — May —

of 96

6

November — January — February — March — April — May —

PRIORITY 3: PROMOTE EQUITY, DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION IN THE LEGAL PROFESSION

ACTIVITY 3.1 ENGAGE WITH JUSTICE SECTOR PLAYERS AND EQUITY-SEEKING COMMUNITIES TO ENHANCE ACCESS TO LEGAL SERVICES AND THE JUSTICE SYSTEM Collaborate with other justice sector partners to promote a more accessible and relational justice system. Projects include A2JCC, #TalkJustice and the Prestons Land Issues Initiative. Outcome: Identified and measured outcomes developed in consultation with other justice stakeholders Responsibility – ED, E&A Officer, A2JCC

Work Plan July — convene SenseMaker project team and begin design of project; Pilot project for Prestons Land Issues continue: pro bono files, information sessions in community working with DNR; #TalkJustice: stories from 211 and LISNS September — hold story circles at the Mi’kmaw Native Friendship Centre and the Law Courts; #TalkJustice: launch of SenseMaker project; Pilot project for Prestons Land Issues continue: pro bono files, information sessions in community working with DNR October — design of SenseMaker tool; Pilot project for Prestons Land Issues continue: pro bono files, information sessions in community working with DNR; Planning and organizing other #TalkJustice community engagement projects November — province-wide distribution of questionnaire January — February — March — April — May —

Status July — September — SenseMaker project is on schedule; Stories from LISNS and 211 complete October — #TalkJustice work ongoing. Several sessions held and data collected; doing a collaborative program with 3rd yr law students; A2JCC remains intimately involved with this work November — Project continuing; third year law students undertook interviews at various court houses on Nov 17 as part of their PR course January — February — March — April — May —

A2JCC

ACTIVITY 3.2 RESPOND TO THE CALLS TO ACTION OF THE TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION Collaborate with the other Atlantic law societies and law

Work Plan July — assembled an Atlantic Team

Status July — Law societies are sharing materials

of 96

7

schools on education initiatives that respond to Calls to Action 27 and 28. Support the work of community organizations in the area of Murdered and Missing Indigenous Women and Girls and Aboriginal Child Welfare. Outcome: A plan is developed for collaboration among law societies and law schools, cultural competence training and measurement Responsibility – ED, E&A Officer

composed of the law societies of New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Prince Edward Island; Tuma Young presents to judiciary and the Society’s Annual Meeting; Continued support for Indigenous Women’s organizations as they prepare for the Commission on Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women. September — second conference call: Focus is cost-sharing for building online education module; Planning to bring blanket exercise to legal community; TRC materials included in Skills Course October — third conference call November — January — February — March — April — May —

and information that could be useful for the TRC education module September — October — Project in development; FLSC also developing its approach and we will co-ordinate with them November — No change January — February — March — April — May —

ACTIVITY 3.3 ADVANCE CULTURAL COMPETENCE AND INCLUSIVENESS IN THE LEGAL PROFESSION AND THE JUSTICE SYSTEM Deliver educational initiatives to improve the knowledge, skills, attitudes and actions required for lawyers working with Nova Scotia’s diverse communities. Outcome: A demonstrable change in the attitudes of the profession and legal entities toward cultural competence education and increased cultural competence in practice Responsibility – Sen. and Prof staff, E&C, E&A Officer

Work Plan July — preparations for Skills Course; Meeting with Minister re: diversity in judicial appointments process; September — Skills Course workshop on cultural competency; first-year law lecture on cultural competence in the legal profession; Seminar for Crown Attorneys at annual conference October — Skills Course workshop on cultural competency November — Skills Course workshop on cultural competency; teaching access to justice in third-year ethics class at the law school January — February — March — April — May —

Status July — September — October — Training session for CIC and Society staff in October November — No change January — February — March — April — May —

of 96

8

4. FOUNDATIONAL ACTIVITY

ACTIVITY 4.1 — FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY Develop a plan to address long-term financial stability including multi-year budgeting

. Outcome: A long-term plan for financial stability Responsibility – Dir. Fin & Admin, Finance C’tee, Council

Work Plan July — September — form working group from Finance Committee, develop historical, demographic and financial information October — establish budget criteria and seek input from stakeholders November — continue work on criteria January — develop first draft of financial assumptions February — first draft of three-year budget March — second draft of three-year budget April — finalize three-year budget May —

Status July — September — October — Fin C’tee TF has completed initial work and Fin. C’tee has approved direction of work; report to Council in Oct. November — Fin. TF has identified several areas where longer term work is required on cost containment or reorganization of activities; focus now on examining revenue issues January — February — March — April — May —

ACTIVITY 4.2 — STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS AND ENGAGEMENT WITH THE LEGAL PROFESSION, STAKEHOLDERS AND THOSE WHO ARE IMPACTED BY LEGAL REGULATION Review and as necessary amend and update the Strategic Communication and Engagement Plan to ensure that it remains relevant and effective to address the implementation of Legal Services Regulation and the new Strategic Framework. Outcome: An updated Strategic Communication and Engagement Plan for 2016 to 2019 Responsibility – ED, Executive, Communications Officer, Council

Work Plan July — await Council’s new Strategic Framework and Activity Plan September — use Strategic Framework and Activity Plan to map out communication and engagement priorities and strategies October — finish drafting the 2016-2019 Strategic Communication and Engagement Plan, provide to Council November — focus on enhancing outcomes measurement and evaluation of communication and engagement activity January — provide Communications and Engagement Monitoring Report to Council

Status July — Council approved 2016-2019 Strategic Framework September — review and drafting in progress October — Plan being revised and may be ready for Council in Oct, but if not in November November — No change January — February — March — April — May —

of 96

9

February — March — April — May —

ACTIVITY 4.3 — PROMOTING AND MAINTAINING EFFECTIVE RELATIONSHIPS THROUGH SINCERE, SUBSTANTIVE AND SUSTAINED ENGAGEMENT AND ADOPTING RESTORATIVE APPROACHES Using restorative principles to guide our consultations with individuals and community groups regarding and to think through the ways we address harm and conflict. Outcome: A demonstrated commitment to new forms of community and stakeholder engagement that are Triple S and use restorative approaches Responsibility – ED, E&A Officer, Exec.

Work Plan

July — NSBS staff attended the Restorative Justice conference held in Halifax; Equity & Access Office staff attended the Be the Peace conference in Bridgewater, focusing on sexual and domestic violence. The Equity & Access Officer regularly meets with community members to proactively identify issues of access to justice. September — See work on #TalkJustice/SenseMaker in 3.1. October — November — January — February — March — April — May —

Status July — September — October — #TalkJustice has created several new relationships; working with Halifax United Way to create a community network for as well as #TalkJustice ongoing liaison relating to LSR November — Ongoing; several workshops jointly hosted with United Way have been organized to start in December January — February — March — April — May —

of 96


From: Darrel Pink


Subject: ED Reports to Council

Member Category

2016 2015

Nov Oct June April March Feb Jan Nov Aug July

Practising Lawyers 1966 1971 1945 1937 1936 1935 1944 1950 1922 1929

Non-Practising Members 681 680 690 714 712 714 704 703 712 702 Retired Members 195 193 189 168 166 167 165 163 159 152

Articled Clerks 87 86 85 67 65 62 66 66 70 66

Activity Plan The Activity Plan has been updated. Highlights:

The Pilot Project is well underway. The early learnings are significant. The value of the face-to-face contact is significant, but the time to arrange meetings is more than anticipated. By January we will have a much better sense.

Met with DoJ re legislation. Our approach aligns with government’s expectations. Timing may not be as originally represented to us. We will still meet our deadline, but DoJ may not be able to meet government’s timeline for spring 2017 legislative session. We are monitoring this closely.

Finance TF has identified 3 areas where costs can either be contained or realigned. These are all longer term initiatives that will not have significant impact on 2017 budget. Focus will move to rethinking revenue and developing and consulting on some new approaches.

Some initial and very encouraging results are being seen from different approaches to PR. With the support of the CIC, staff has developed and is implementing a mentoring program for a small law firm that will entail support from a senior lawyer, admin assistance to address a high volume of legal aid certificate processing and wellness support. Staff has introduced to the PRPPC some new proactive approaches to the intake process that will come to Council for consideration in due course.

of 96

Other Matters

1. Lawrence Rubin has been hired as the new Insurance Director. He will start with us at the beginning of January. He comes from Toronto (though he originally was from Moncton) with about 25 years experience in various insurance companies and various levels of seniority in both claims and insurance management. He will be moving with his wife, as their children are in university.

2. As Daren Baxter indicated last month, ongoing discussion regarding specifics of the liability claims program will be addressed when the new Director is in place.

3. Notice for a Special General Meeting has been distributed for a meeting to be held on January 19, 2017.

4. I am travelling to Kenya for 1 week to work with the Law Society there on the development of new regulations, which are required with the enactment of a new Law Society Act. I am working with the former Treasurer of LSUC, Janet Minor. The project is sponsored by the CBA.

of 96

President’s Report

November 21, 2016

The following is a summary of my activities as President since July 21, 2016:

July 21 – Governance and Nominating Committee meeting July 21 – Pride Week Annual Reception July 22 – Council Meeting July 26 –Meeting with Minister of Justice, with ED August 12 – Executive meeting August 12 – Meeting with Fred Crooks August 15 – Various media interviews August 16 – Telephone conference with presidents of other Atlantic provinces law societies re

Supreme Court Appoint Provinces August 18 – Media interviews September 6 – Participate in First Day of Law School at Dalhousie Law School September 8 – GNC meeting September 13 – Executive Committee (attended by phone) September 14 – 17 – International Legal Regulators Conference, Washington, DC September 19 – Meeting with ED and past presidents Ron Creighton and Catherine Walker re

Land Registry system September 23 – Meeting with Service Nova Scotia re Land Registry System October 5 – Participate in Smith Shield Moot, Dalhousie Law School October 14 – Executive Meeting October 14 – Call to the Bar October 18 – Cape Breton Barrister’s Society Meeting, Sydney, NS October 18 – 21 – Federation of Law Societies of Canada Conference, St. Andrews, NB October 22 – Federation of Law Societies of Canada Council Meeting, St. Andrews, NB October 28 – Council Meeting November 1 - Meeting with Service Nova Scotia re Land Registry Office November 4 – Executive Meeting November 8 – Telephone conference with Chair and ED of Law Foundation November 15 – Meeting at Department of Justice re Request for Legislation November 16 – Meeting with Law Corporations Working Group November 16 – Meeting at Department of Justice re future of Law Foundation

Daren Baxter, QC, TEP

page 1 of 96 council agenda - nsbs...

Documents