of self regulation? - The Law Society of Upper Canada

Queen’s Bench in Saskatchewan, but also requested that this review not delay the claim
and payment process. 51 The request to expedite the claim and payment process was
granted, and the settlement agreement, including the portion relating to fees, was
approved by the courts on March 22, 2007. 52 As of November, 2007, the fees of
Merchant Law Group had not yet conclusively been settled, although the majority of the
controversy surrounding them appears to have quieted now that the claims process is
back on track. 53
Despite the controversy surrounding the Merchant Law Group’s fees and billing
practices, despite the concerns raised by a former Supreme Court Justice and forensic
auditors, the Law Societies showed no interest in investigating Mr. Merchant’s billing
practices (Mr. Merchant is a member of three). In fact, they supported him in his reliance
on solicitor-client privilege to block the government’s efforts to verify his billing. 54 The
reality that the Law Societies seem uninterested in even investigating claims of this
nature is cause for serious concern. One would expect, particularly in light of the growing
criticism of legal billing practices and fees for legal services more generally, 55 that the
Law Societies would want to be certain that allegations of this nature were investigated
thoroughly rather than simply closing ranks around the lawyer involved without any
inquiry into the matter.
7. Mandatory CLE
51 Court Notice, Class Action Services – Indian Residential Schools (31 January 2007) online:
52 Court Notice, Class Action Services – Indian Residential Schools (22 March 2007) online:
53 See Kirbyson, supra note 39.
54 See Gatehouse, supra note 42.
55 See eg Alice Woolley, “Time for Change: Unethical Hourly Billing in the Canadian Profession and What
Should be Done About it” (2004) 83 Can. Bar Rev. 859 [Woolley, “Time for Change”].
16