I need to retake the solicitor but I've been working long hours with no energy left at the end of the day. I'm wondering whether it would make more sense for me to retake it in the Feb sitting instead of November.

Are there any downsides to taking it in February? Will I still get called to the bar along with everyone in my cohort?

Any thoughts or advice would be much appreciated!

Generally, in life I am pretty friendly and likable and all my former colleagues have said they really enjoy working with me. The issue is it takes me awhile to warm up to people/be comfortable opening up and for interviews this results in me interviewing like an unenthusiastic sociopathic robot. Obviously, law interviews hugely hinge on vibes and being great on paper is not enough. I have been grinding on my interview skills/how I frame answers/messaging and my personal brand but being introverted and shy is really hindering my performance.

So, does anyone have any recommendations for acing law interviews as an introvert? How do I show off my friendly/likeable side when it makes me so uncomfortable?

Ontario btw. Basic concept of promissory estoppel question. Does this refer to the ability to force the opponent to keep his words when an offer was promised, and i acted relying on his words? And Estoppel Based on Fact means the ability to force the opponent to pretend what he claimed to be true to be true until the end of the courts if i relied on his "facts"? Does this mean if i did not rely on his promise of offering something, or his claim of something to be true, i cannot demand an estoppel in the courts? Like the situation where i did not rely on it, but i would like that to happen or i would like the effect of that being true.

Do law firms really act like this?

TLDR:

• Monkhouse Law was involved in a fee dispute with a former client
• Monkhouse then submitted a bill to the client for $25k
• Monkhouse claimed that the firm had billed 66.5 hours on the matter:
  • 50.8 hours —"correspondence" (email/telephone)
  • 12.9 hours — drafting a representation letter, a demand letter, a statement of claim; and an amended statement of claim (which the court held "was only necessary because Monkhouse Law made significant and elementary errors when it drafted the initial statement of claim")
  • The bill also included time billed *by the firm's receptionist (*at a whopping rate of $200/hour) as well as time that Monkhouse spent working after the retainer was terminated

As a cherry on top, the court noted that Monkhouse failed to file affidavits for any individual lawyer or employee listed on the bill. Instead, they filed the affidavit of an articling student who hadn't worked on the matter because they hadn't even started working at the firm when this was going on. Here's what the court had to say about that:

[45]           To be clear, I am not blaming Ms. Hum for the deficiencies in her evidence. Monkhouse Law should never have put her in this situation.[18] It was inappropriate for a law firm to ask an articling student to provide affidavit evidence about contested points in a fee dispute (including opinion evidence regarding the quality of the firm’s representation), much less to do so in a case that was completed long before she arrived at the firm. Monkhouse Law should have tendered an affidavit from one, or both, of Ms. Rawlinson and Mr. Monkhouse. I will weigh the frailties of the evidence provided by the firm as I assess the account.

Link: https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2024/2024onsc4970/2024onsc4970.html?resultId=6ff3cf99e47241d3bf4fb08c0a7a08a4&searchId=2024-09-13T19:00:31:633/e97249fba7454c34a1cb8fd1c8f983b1&searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAUIndyb25nZnVsIGRpc21pc3NhbCIAAAAAAQ#_ftnref18

I’m a third-year call practicing employment law in GTA (both management and employee side). I don’t see myself enjoying this area at all. I have been speaking to recruiters and other lawyers but the only lateral opportunities available are at other employment law firms. I am interested in construction, land development and real estate, but I’ve been told that these are niche areas and barely hire anyone without prior experience. For those who have successfully switched practice areas, how did you do it? Would it be possible to approach firms and offer to work at a lower salary to gain experience?

An important win in the Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision, Pearce v. Canada (Staff of the Non-Public Funds, Canadian Forces).

Non unionized employees of Canadian forces morale and welfare services (staff of non public funds) have the right to bring a civil action against cfmws for wrongful/constructive dismissal common law notice

The Court concluded that an employee of an undesignated separate agency may bring a civil action against their employer for constructive dismissal because:

Undesignated Separate Agency employees do not have access to third party adjudication for non-disciplinary terminations. Therefore, they must be given the alternative of finding a remedy under civil action (i.e. suing); and, The interpretation of the term “termination” under s. 236 (3) includes a termination by way of constructive dismissal. The Court’s Reasoning

The appeal turned on the interpretation of a s. 236(3) of the FPSLRA, which states:

Subsection (1) does not apply in respect of an employee of a separate agency that has not been designated under subsection 209 (3) if the dispute relates to his or her termination of employment for any reason that does not relate to a breach of discipline or misconduct. Pearce v. Canada (Staff of the Non-Public Funds, Canadian Forces)]

2021 ONCA 65

Court of Appeal for Ontario, Strathy C.J.O., Rouleau and Coroza JJ.A.

February 3, 2021

Employment — Wrongful dismissal — Constructive dismissal — Jurisdiction — Employee of federal public service entity bringing grievances over harassment and ultimately resigning due to toxic work environment — Employee commencing action for constructive dismissal — Employer unsuccessfully moving to dismiss action for lack of jurisdiction — Employer’s appeal dismissed — Federal Public Service Labour Relations Act identified employer as an "undesignated separate agency" whose employees could sue over termination for any reason not related to breach of discipline or misconduct — Interpreting ordinary meaning of words of statute in context, "any reason" included constructive dismissal — Federal Public Service Labour Relations Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, s. 236(3).

Statutes — Interpretation — Principles of interpretation — Employee of federal public service entity bringing grievances over harassment and ultimately resigning due to toxic work environment — Employee commencing action for constructive dismissal — Employer unsuccessfully moving to dismiss action for lack of jurisdiction — Employer’s appeal dismissed — Federal Public Service Labour Relations Act identified employer as an "undesignated separate agency" whose employees could sue over termination for any reason not related to breach of discipline or misconduct — Interpreting ordinary meaning of words of statute in context, "any reason" included constructive dismissal — Federal Public Service Labour Relations Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, s. 236(3).

The plaintiff was a non-unionized employee of the defendant. The defendant was a federal public service entity and an "undesignated separate agency" as defined by the Federal Public Service Labour Relations Act ("FPSLRA"). As an employee of an undesignated separate agency, the plaintiff was a member of a class of federal public servant entitled to sue an employer in court for disputes relating to termination of employment for any reason not related to a breach of discipline or misconduct. In 2009, the plaintiff brought a grievance in which he alleged that he had been harassed by his supervisor over persistent and largely unfounded allegations of wrongdoing against him. He alleged that although his grievance was resolved, his position was downgraded, and some of his responsibilities were taken away from him. In 2014, his department was reorganized, and he was required to report to a more junior individual. He claimed that his former supervisor continued to harass him. In March 2017, he initiated another grievance for harassment. He then went on medical leave and shortly after returning to work resigned in June 2017 due to an allegedly toxic work environment. He commenced an action for damages for constructive dismissal plus moral damages for breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing. The defendant brought a motion to dismiss the action on the grounds that the plaintiff had voluntarily resigned and that the court had no jurisdiction to hear the constructive dismissal claim of a federal government employee. The motion judge rejected the defendant’s submission that the lawsuit was simply a series of employment complaints that could have been grieved. She found that even if the essential character of the dispute was a series of grievable events, if one or a combination of those events was or amounted to a non-disciplinary termination, then the employee had a right to sue under s. 236(3) of the FPSLRA and that such termination included constructive dismissal. The motion was dismissed. The defendant appealed.

Held, the appeal should be dismissed.

The Ruling

The Court concluded that an employee of an undesignated separate agency may bring a civil action against their employer for constructive dismissal because:

Undesignated Separate Agency employees do not have access to third party adjudication for non-disciplinary terminations. Therefore, they must be given the alternative of finding a remedy under civil action (i.e. suing); and, The interpretation of the term “termination” under s. 236 (3) includes a termination by way of constructive dismissal. The Court’s Reasoning

The appeal turned on the interpretation of a s. 236(3) of the FPSLRA, which states:

Subsection (1) does not apply in respect of an employee of a separate agency that has not been designated under subsection 209 (3) if the dispute relates to his or her termination of employment for any reason that does not relate to a breach of discipline or misconduct.

https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/2021/2021onca65/2021onca65.html?resultId=98537bf17352498886fa5ee4b50a88ca&searchId=2024-09-13T14:24:27:390/cc0331faf1294552b07127aacdd0f422

Junior associate (1st year) and in the job market. I’m meeting a senior associate for a coffee and they know I’m looking for work. Although it’s just coffee, is it more of an informal interview? What’re the next steps after this usually? Equally, it could just be coffee to see how we vibe and be the end of it.

I knew somebody from high school in Winnipeg that was just charged with some nasty things, I’m wondering what would be the minimum and maximum sentence they could be given if he gets convicted.

1 Unauthorized Possession of a Firearm 2 Possession of a Loaded Prohibited or Restricted Firearm 3 Unauthorized Possession of a Firearm in a Motor Vehicle 4 Possession of Property Obtained by Crime Under $5000

Edit: Im not looking for legal advice. I’m purely curious about this persons situation and what they are dealing with. It’s strange seeing someone you knew a long time ago like this.

Has anyone who's currently articling received their invite? I anticipated the LSO to screw up the roll out but not this badly.

Hi! I'm currently in the Civil Law section of the National Program at U Ottawa and I was wondering if anyone knows if there's a summary database available for these courses like there is for the Common Law program. Thanks in advance!

Hey everyone

I got an email from the LSO today for licensing. I went to the administrative call section but there was no form for me to complete and upload for admin call. Anyone else having this issue?

Hello! I've been googling the differences between the Canadian Bill of Rights and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. By doing so, I stumbled on the same question on this r/ from 6 years ago.

I didn't understand one of the top answers which said: • "Any act could be declared notwithstanding the Bill of Rights. In the Charter the notwithstanding clause has a limitation of 5 years as a protection"

Another comment under that one says:
"Not just that, but because it was written as an ordinary statute, any law coming after it which us in conflict would be automatically taken to supercede it. There's no special language or invocation required"

I completely understand what the notwithstanding clause is in the Charter, but I don't understand what it looks like under the Bill nor what these commenters are talking about in relation to it.

Could anyone clarify? Thank you!

Are there any banking benefits for lawyers with specific banks, ex. discounted interest rates, etc.?

Hi,

I am British and moved here a couple of years back. I am a foreign licensing candidate, but not Canadian. I've found it relatively easy to get an articling position by being a law clerk and essentially getting a wonderful, mid-size ID firm to let me do my NCAs and be their articling student now I'm done. After hearing all the articling horror stories, it is a relief to be valued and well paid.

I'm currently articling in an insurance defence firm. I've only just started really and I'm already doing trial prep and really getting involved. I was a law clerk before and my current firm is great and has been preparing me for articling for ages. It's been great to start in this area as I got to slip right in to actual work, it's challenging, and I feel like I'm off to a great start because even though I was just a clerk, I know this area of law, how the process works, the procedural side and there isn't really anything they can throw at me that I haven't done in some capacity, even if more minor.

However, this isn't an area I want to stay in forever. I'm still thinking about that but my main interest is corporate law. But aside from commercial awareness and interest, how else can I prep to try and find a job post-call in this area? What other areas does ID connect well with?

I'm getting direct trial experience and litigation experience. This firm is amazing for exposure and learning. I will probably stay here as an associate for a bit.

But that being said, how can I prepare myself to change to a different industry? Any advice?

I don't care about the hard work. That doesn't faze me. I know there are no shortcuts. I'm just looking for any advice!

Thank you.

Good Day if anyone is interested in being a Judge this would be an interesting event to attend

https://caldacjsh.wordpress.com/2024/09/09/aspire-to-judge-learn-what-it-takes-to-build-a-judicial-career-and-how-we-can-support-a-more-diverse-judiciary-in-canada/

does anyone know where the toronto bar exams take place? i remember reading it somewhere but i cant seem to find the answer anywhere

Hello, I have a bit of a predicament.

I submitted my request to be re-instated 10-weeks ago and the LSO still has not gotten back to me. I want to start studying but cannot register until ive been re-instated but cannot get the materials until I've registered but canot register until ive been re-instated and the LSO is dragging their feet on this. Would anyone be willing to share the Barrister materials with me?

I just want to get them printed and start reading already. The LSO's website says 4 weeks response time but its well past that. This isn't an attempt to try and fool anyone or get the materials for free. I still have to register like everyone else and just want the materials so I can start studying.

Thanks!

title. I was wondering if that was an advantage for new lawyers looking to clerk before working in big law.

i’m still in my undergrad but i want to build my resume in preparation for law school, although i’m not too sure how. a lot of internships are focused around business and the local police stations don’t offer summer programs to undergrad students so my next best idea was to just email a bunch of lawyers in my area explaining my situation to them and asking if i could work for them during the summer so that i can develop more skills. i know this is pretty desperate but it doesn’t hurt to try, im just curious about what to expect in response. how would you react?

What is the actual reasoning behind these laws being implemented?

And dont you fucking dare say "liberals".

im in my first year of university and was wondering when everyone studied for their LSATs/when is the best time to start studying for them? Also what year is best to take them in your opinion?

it has only been a week, but I already feel horrible about law school. so many readings I can't keep up with them all, and I hardly understand any of the content, anybody else feel like this in 1L? does it get better? please tell me it does lmaoo

Layperson here.

My understanding is that crown's decision to proceed in any case was based on (1) public interest and (2) likelihood of conviction.

A sexual assault case of a friend invokes a he-said/she-said scenario, of which the complainant's version of events is so strikingly unbeliveable, it defies logic. Defense attorney says the charges are ridiculous. Defense attorney says the Crown also believes story is not believable, but is pressing forward because s/he could not persuade complainant to allow a peace bond/stay/etc. in lieu of trial.

How is it, then, that a case can proceed if the likelihood of conviction is very low? Was there a change in the law that requires Crowns to pursue a laid charge [in Ontario] if complainant insists, despite the weak case?

i am in my final year of undergrad and I am applying to law schools in november. I feel confident law is what I want to do. i am not a big partier. i like to work hard and i enjoy school. However, part of me fears that jumping into law school straight from undergrad is going to make me miss out on my 20s. Like should i take a gap year? does any one regret not taking a gap year? Like my LSAT is 163 which im happy with 4.0/4.3 GPA and I have personal statement done and everythig ready to go for applications im just worried that im moving along to fast. I am also worried i don't have certain skills required for law school -- for example i am a bit afriad of public speaking. Am i dumb for applying right away? i do not really want to take a gap year but all i see everywhere is people syaing you shou.d

What do you do if you really believe in a case but the firm you are working for does not want you to take it

I had today one it was quite a mess. Simple adjournment led to two rounds of negotiations with duty counsel, small argument before the court & one more court appearance two days from now. Duty counsel and judge laughed when I asked if the doc will be served through CSO or email.

I am an articled student, not complaining just want to process all that happen & reflect