This is my last blog of the week and I’m still banging on about access to justice. This is an issue that I feel strongly about, and my guess is that the same is true for readers of this blog. Today I would like to finish up by dealing with the topic that is contentious – the cost of legal services and the changing landscape for the delivery of those services.
If one reads the books and reports on the changing landscape for legal services, one will quickly conclude that automation will fundamentally change the business models that many firms employ. I doubt, however, that anyone reading this blog has reason to fear technology. Indeed, in this age of scientific innovation one wonders whether technology will ever be up to the task of sitting patiently with a client and discussing her preferences as to who should be appointed her continuing attorney for management of her personal care and property, and, who should inherit her estate. These are intensely personal discussions in which the proclivities of partners and children must be laid bare and decisions must be made as to how to divide an estate which will fluctuate in value as the client ages. Questions of tax efficiency are often thought to be the centrepiece of such discussions, but experience leads one to think otherwise. Clients are often less concerned with saving tax and more keen on obtaining peace of mind; to know that a plan has been put in place and will be carried to completion after their demise. It’s not for nothing that lawyers are categorically in a fiduciary position vis-à-vis their clients.
How then can we increase the ability of legal professionals to serve clients more efficiently and increase access to legal services? Obviously the market operates to price the price that lawyers and paralegals charge their clients for their time, and in my opinion this is not something that regulation could do better. Where I think lawyers can do better generally is in mentoring articling students and junior associates to take on more client work (under supervision) in mundane cases and teach them the skills that machines don’t possess. A number of years ago I started an Elder Law Clinic in the Faculty of Law, Queen’s University. The students drafted Wills and Powers of Attorney and did a range of other working on legal issues bound up with age and ageing. They did very good work and filled a niche not served by private practitioners, legal aid clinics, or lawyers retained through Ontario Legal Aid Plan certificates. As a profession, I believe that we can get much more meaningful work out of our junior colleagues if we are disposed to do so and I think that we should do so. Our colleagues can do a world of good for those people struggling to retain lawyers by making available lower-priced services as part of their ongoing training.
Have a great weekend everyone!
David