Advocacy Matters - Spring 2020

ADVOCACY MATTERS
The Advocates’ Society
SPRING 2020

CONTENTS
04
07
14
16
18
21
29
31
34
37
Chair Chat
Hilary Book, Book Law
Covid-19 and Advocacy
Heather Meredith, Trevor Courtis, Christine Vanderschoot, and Lionel Tupman
End Of Term Dinner TM 2020
Tamara Ramsey, Dale & Lessmann LLP
10+ Program Update
Kathryn Bird, Hicks Morley Hamilton Stewart Storie LLP
10+ Standing Committee Event Report
Andrea Gonsalves, Stockwoods LLP
Roundtable on Mentorship
Compiled by Lionel Tupman, Tupman & Bloom LLP
TAS Report - Toronto
Sumeet (Sonu) Dhanju-Dhillon, Torkin Manes LLP
COVID-19
Yola S. Ventresca, Lerners LLP
Quirky Case
Tamara Ramsey, Dale & Lessmann LLP
Journal Review: Then and Now
Christine Vanderschoot, Vanderschoot Family Law
Thank You to Editor Brent Arnold, Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP
for his outstanding work and commitment to Advocacy
Matters this term. The pen now passes to our new Editor
Tamara Ramsey, Dale & Lessmann LLP, who welcomes member
contributions for our ‘pages’. #TASProud
40
Remote Advocacy
Brent J. Arnold, Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP
Editor: Brent J. Arnold, Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP
The opinions expressed by individual authors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the policies of The Advocates’ Society.
3

What the TWEET is this?
When you see this icon, throughout the publication,
click on it to see what members are tweeting about.
CHAIR CHAT
Chair Chat
Hilary Book, Book Law
Friday, March 13 was the last time I attended
court in person. By the afternoon of March
16, my associate, my assistant and I had shifted
to working full-time from home, although
it wasn’t clear the extent to which we’d have
any work to do. The courts were closed. Outof-court
examinations were cancelled. Clients
and opposing parties were dealing with their
own challenges, trying to figure out how to
manage and stay afloat.
That first week was a tough one. In between
reassuring staff and reaching out to clients, I
spent way too much time on social media reading
horrible stories about the rationing of ventilators
in Italy and following dire statistics and predictions
about what was going to happen here.
I worried about my family, who live in Alberta,
which now seems so far away. I worried about
the marginalized and vulnerable – the homeless,
those who struggle for food security, First Nations
communities without clean drinking water or adequate
housing, and more. I wondered when I,
who live alone, would next be able to be within 2
metres of another real live person.
I figured my doctor friends and acquaintances
would be busy at work that week, but their surgeries
were being cancelled, their appointments
postponed. Their hospitals were filling up with
empty beds, preparing for the onslaught. I was
worried about the future of my firm, but as I
thought about the doctors and nurses and all of
the front-line workers, and what they were getting
prepared to do, I couldn’t help but wonder
whether my firm, my work, my profession even
mattered any more.
It quickly became apparent that we do. Criminal
lawyers got to work immediately trying to
get bail for their clients so that they won’t be
living in crowded prisons if and when COVID
strikes. Employment lawyers did a year’s worth
of CPD in a few days so that they could advise
their clients on their rights and obligations in
these uncertain times. Family lawyers helped
clients navigate access and support issues.
On April 6, TAS President Scott Maidment
interviewed Chief Justice Morawetz in a virtual
fireside chat. Nearly 1,200 of us tuned in to
watch. Among many important messages, the
Chief Justice reminded us that the courts are
not, in fact, closed. They will never be closed.
They are a branch of government, just like Parliament,
and they will continue to function.
We are not front-line workers. We have the
privilege of doing our work while safely physical
distancing. But even now, especially now,
what we do still matters. Whether we are acting
for an accused person or a terminated employee
or an oppressed shareholder or yes, even
a multibillion-dollar multinational corporation,
we are helping to maintain our constitutional
democracy and the rule of law.
Ten weeks in, like everyone else, I’m still worried
about a lot. We are only at the start of this,
and there is so much about the future we can’t
even begin to predict. I don’t know what life will
look like in 6 months or one year or five years.
But I am confident that the rule of law will still
govern, the courts will still be open, and the Bar
will still serve the public and the administration
of justice. Advocacy Matters.
This issue has some pieces from the “Before
Times” (Sonu Dhanju-Dhillon report on the
Mid-Career Women’s Social, Andrea Gonsalves
reports on our Management for Litigators event
in February) and the “COVID Times” (Brent Arnold,
Heather Meredith, Christine Vanderschoot,
and Lionel Tupman contribute articles on how
the courts are continuing to function during
COVID; 10+ Committee members contribute
on how they’re working from home), and some
pieces that are timeless (Tamara Ramsey’s latest
Quirky Case, Christine Vanderschoot’s look back
on David Stockwood’s 1997 article on civility, and
Lionel Tupman’s Trailblazers Roundtable). Kudos
to Tamara Ramsey and Brent Arnold, and
the TAS staff, for keeping the presses running.
My term as Chair of 10+ is up in June, so this
will be my final Chair Chat. It’s been an eventful
and exciting year, and a privilege to lead a committee
with so many dedicated, creative and
hard-working members. Yola Ventresca will
take over as Chair in June, with Emily Lawrence
as Vice-Chair and Chloe Snider as Secretary. I
know they will do an excellent job of continuing
to build 10+ and further engaging mid-career
advocates, even in these troubled times.
I’ll sign off with my new standard, be well and
stay safe and healthy!
4 5

COVID-19 AND ADVOCACY
Security is a
Fragile Thing
Emailing legal documents
is NOT private.
Neither is a USB key, CD,
or consumer file sharing.
xchangedocs is a secure portal for exchanging
documents between opposing parties, clients,
experts, process servers, and others through
a platform located safely in Canada.
It’s less costly than a courier, handles any
file size, and provides a full audit trail.
Call or email today for a consultation.
800-340-3234 | info@korbitecinc.com
www.xchangedocs.ca
Documents on the move, safely.
Practice on the
Commercial and Estates
List and in Family Law
during COVID-19
Heather Meredith, Trevor Courtis,
Christine Vanderschoot, and Lionel Tupman
What an unusual time to be a lawyer! We are witnessing monumental and
arguably long-overdue changes to our profession and our practice before
Ontario’s Courts.
The Advocacy Matters editorial team thought it might be useful to our
readers to provide some updates regarding the COVID-19 related changes
to practice in three unique areas of advocacy. This article reviews changes
to practice on the Commercial List, the Estates List, and in Family Law matters
in Toronto.
Practice and procedure in the era of COVID-19 is dynamic and fluid, however
at the time of writing this article, here are some of the relevant things
for counsel to consider when practising in the areas described herein.
7

Commercial List Practice
during COVID-19
Heather Meredith & Trevor Courtis,
McCarthy Tétrault LLP
The Scenario - The teleconference motion started
more than 8 hours before. A child giggles in
the background. A dog barks. Everyone is reminded
to please mute their phones. The judge
interrupts counsel to apologize that his phone
is running out of batteries – and notes he has
already used the other phones in his house. He
somehow finds a way to continue and, with patience
and perseverance, all submissions are
made and a receivership order is issued as requested.
While not the most traditional of motions,
motions like this one are both part of the
new post-COVID normal and also a reflection of
the finest traditions of the Commercial List.
The Commercial List in Toronto has long
been known for its hard-working and dedicated
judges who seem to always find a way to
have matters heard in “real time” as and when
required. The stories of Justice Farley making
himself available - issuing judgments handwritten
on hotel paper or speaking to counsel from
a phone booth on the road - are legendary. The
judges who followed have consistently been responsive,
generous with their time and creative
in finding solutions. Consistent with that history,
the Commercial List is now facing the challenge
of COVID-19 shut-downs and restrictions
in true Commercial List form - barely missing a
beat in hearing and responding to the commercial
cases before them.
In mid-March 2020, following the suspension
of in-person services of courts in Ontario, the
Commercial List announced that it would be restricted
to hearing urgent matters. However, it
also clarified that a broad array of cases would
be considered urgent and heard by the Court,
including insolvency staples such as CCAA and
receivership applications, stay extensions and
sale approvals. Shortly thereafter, on April 2,
2020, the Commercial List resumed hearing
non-urgent matters of 4 hours estimated duration
or less, including select motions, applications,
case management conferences and
pre-trial conferences. The April 2, 2020 Notice
to the Profession with further details can be
found here: https://www.ontariocourts.ca/scj/
notice-to-profession-to/#E_Commercial_and_
Estate_List_Matters. As a result, at this point,
many matters on the Commercial List are carrying
on almost as usual – though with a number
of process changes.
Counsel are encouraged to review the Ontario
Courts website for the latest process requirements;
however, as of the time of writing this
article, the following is a high-level summary of
recommended processes on the Commercial List:
Format for Hearings: Parties are encouraged
to consider motions in writing for appropriate
(uncontested) matters. For contested matters,
the moving party has discretion to set up the
hearing by either teleconference or videoconference.
The moving party is required to set up the
facility for the hearing and provide the details to
the judge and the participants. Commercial List
judges seem to increasingly prefer videoconference
hearings, particularly through Zoom.
Scheduling a hearing: In order to schedule
a hearing, counsel are required to e-mail
the Commercial List office at MAG.CSD.To.SC-
JCom@ontario.ca, noting the matter, the purpose
of the hearing, the supervising judge (if
applicable), the date and amount of time requested
and the proposed manner of hearing.
The coordinator is not currently requiring
counsel to submit hearing request forms. The
coordinator will provide a date and time and
request that counsel circulate a calendar invite
to the supervising judge and the Commercial
List office with the conference details.
Filing materials: Materials are filed by e-mailing
the judge and the Commercial List office
along with proof of service. E-mails cannot exceed
10 Mb. While filings can be submitted in
multiple e-mails, the Court expects parties to
make “every effort” to keep the total size of filed
materials to 10 Mb. Parties should also consider
sending large documents by way of secure
file share rather than attachments. Facta must
include hyperlinks to the cases cited and, accordingly,
a brief of authorities is not necessary.
Conduct of hearings: Counsel bringing the
motion should canvass counsel prior to the
start of the hearing and prepare a counsel slip
to be submitted to the judge and the Commercial
List office. At the outset of the hearing, the
judge generally requests that each party be allowed
to complete their submissions without
interruption, that counsel speak slowly and
clearly, and that all others have their lines on
mute to limit background noise. We have found
that teleconference hearings tend to run longer
than they might have run in person as it is more
difficult for the party making submissions to
8 9

take cues from the judge and others. This is less
of a problem with videoconference hearings,
which are becoming increasingly prevalent as
a result. We have found that videoconference
hearings work very well and tend to result in
increased efficiency without the need to travel
to court and wait for the matter to be heard.
Issuance of Orders: The draft order should
be emailed to the judge separately. The judge
will sign the order (if granted), write a handwritten
endorsement, and scan both back to
the moving party. To have the order issued and
entered, it may be emailed to the manager of
commercial/estates intake who will arrange for
issuance and email it back.
Counsel and the Court are each continuing to
adapt to the unusual situation that we all face.
While some things have not changed - counsel
continues to be encouraged to exercise the
“Three C’s” of the Commercial List: cooperation,
communication, and common sense, and the
judges are as creative, generous and responsive
as ever – we have a new way of operating. It will
be interesting to see whether some of the implemented
changes will remain after the present
crisis ends. In the meantime, aside from the occasional
child crying, dog barking or phone running
out of batteries, the Commercial List is, as
always, getting things done – in real time.
Family Law Practice
during COVID-19
Christine Vanderschoot,
Vanderschoot Family Law
The family law bar is comparatively small, not
just in larger jurisdictions like the Greater Toronto
Area where I practise, but in most communities
where lawyers specialize their practice.
We see each other often, whether in court, at
mediation or settlement meetings, or through
professional organizations.
In the wake of COVID-19 and the restrictions
that have followed, family courts have been restricted
to hearing urgent matters. Now that
family law lawyers are no longer able to meet in
person or attend court, there have been some
positive aspects to report, as well as some negatives
we can learn from as we consider moving
back to “normal” within the next several months.
On the positive side, the family bar has exhibited
a real commitment to clients. In particular,
lawyers have been adept at both finding ways
to serve clients’ urgent needs, and at banding
together through organizations like The Advocates’
Society to ensure that communication
remains strong. I have seen many instances
where one lawyer learned something about the
new realities of practice during physical distancing,
and quickly shared it with her colleagues.
Despite the isolation, there has been a flurry
of activity in our industry, from urgent court matters
to Continuing Legal Education programs put
together by various members of the bar. Conversations
have been inclusive, and information
has been shared in an unprecedented and truly
inspiring manner. I hope that lawyers who have
worked together during this difficult and uncertain
time will continue to do so once the restrictions
ease, and thus create a “new normal” in a
changed profession.
COVID-19 has brought some of the historical
shortcomings of the profession to light as
well. Namely, some have experienced difficulty
transitioning from a largely paper environment
to digital work. But there have been
some advancements made, that may stay in
place post-COVID-19. For example, prior to
COVID-19, family law counsel were prohibited
from serving each other by email without prior
written permission, and Courts would not
accept emailed materials for filing. Since the
physical closure of the Courts, new practice
procedures have come out that allow for these
practices now.
Necessity is the mother of invention during
times of crisis, and while the courts are working
out their new procedures, many lawyers
have encouraged their clients to focus on alternative
dispute resolution for both non-urgent
and urgent matters. Parties have engaged
in Zoom mediation or settlement meetings,
rather than trying to argue that their matter is
sufficiently “urgent” to be heard by the court
during the pandemic.
Patience is still required. Counsel, clients and
the Courts may struggle to change methods
that are long-ingrained, but the commitment
to out-of-court resolution options has continued
to grow in family law over the years, and
now has received an exponential “boost” during
the pandemic. I can only hope that these significant
positive shifts will gain a foothold in a
post-COVID-19 environment, but without lawyers’
commitments to these positive changes
we could see a roll back to the old way of doing
things. That would be a missed opportunity.
10 11

Estates List Practice
during COVID-19
Lionel Tupman, Tupman & Bloom LLP
Estate, trust and power of attorney litigation
matters are often urgent since the issues in
dispute can involve the improper diversion of
funds requiring injunctive relief, or more importantly,
life and death disputes arising from personal
care decisions. It is unsurprising, therefore,
that practice on the Estates List of the
Superior Court of Justice in Toronto has continued
effectively, with cooperation from counsel
and the Court, in the unusual time of COVID-19.
The new reality for practitioners in estate and
trust litigation on the Estates List is that, like our
Commercial List colleagues, we must become
familiar with Zoom or conference call utilities
for court attendances including case conferences,
cross-examinations, judicial settlement
conferences, motions and in some instances,
application hearings.
Lawyers in the estate and trust bar have had
numerous of these court attendances since the
beginning of the COVID-19 isolation period, and
in general, counsel appear to be positive about
the experience of “virtual” courts. Court time
has been more limited than before COVID-19,
which is entirely understandable, and thus “urgent
matters” are prioritized and hearing dates
are readily available, while less urgent matters
are not. Counsel should carefully consider
whether the matter they are seeking to schedule
is actually urgent or not; of course, this
should have happened before COVID-19.
The April 2, 2020 Notice to the Profession with
further details referred to in the Commercial
List portion of this article applies with equal
force to the Estates List.
As it relates to “virtual advocacy”, it is perhaps
more important than ever that counsel refrain
from improperly objecting or interfering in their
colleagues’ submissions, and that strict rules of
order on video-conference court appearances be
followed. One can imagine the chaos which might
ensue with multiple counsel speaking at the same
time, and no ability for the Court to ascertain on
whose behalf submissions were being made.
Estate law in general has changed and revolutionized
considerably in the wake of COVID-19,
since the issuance of recent Orders in Council
dealing with the virtual execution of wills and
power of attorney documents. While the focus
of this portion of the article is on advocacy on
the Estates List, it is relevant for counsel to be
apprised of the “solicitor-side” changes to the
law which will become relevant as will, estate
and power of attorney disputes continue to unfold.
On April 22, 2020, O. Reg. 129/20 under
the Emergency Management and Civil Protection
Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.9 was enacted, authorizing
virtual execution of wills and powers of Attorney.
In relevant part, this Regulation provides:
Wills
2. (1) A requirement under the Succession
Law Reform Act that a testator or witnesses
be present or in each other’s presence for the
making or acknowledgment of a signature
on a will or for the subscribing of a will
may be satisfied by means of audio-visual
communication technology provided that at
least one person who is providing services as
a witness is a licensee within the meaning of
the Law Society Act at the time of the making,
acknowledgment or subscribing.
(2) If a will is executed with the assistance of
audio-visual communication technology as authorized
by subsection (1), the signatures or subscriptions
required by the Succession Law Reform
Act may be made by signing or subscribing
complete, identical copies of the will in counterpart,
which shall together constitute the will.
(3) For the purposes of subsection (2), copies
of a will are identical even if there are minor,
non-substantive differences in format or layout
between the copies.
Powers of attorney
3. (1) A requirement under the Substitute
Decisions Act, 1992 that witnesses be present
for the execution of a power of attorney
may be satisfied by means of audio-visual
communication technology provided that at
least one person who is providing services as
a witness is a licensee within the meaning of
the Law Society Act at the time of the execution.
(2) If a power of attorney is executed with
the assistance of audio-visual communication
technology as authorized by subsection (1), the
signatures required by the Substitute Decisions
Act, 1992 may be made by signing complete,
identical copies of the power of attorney in
counterpart, which shall together constitute
the power of attorney.
(3) For the purposes of subsection (2), copies
of a power of attorney are identical even if
there are minor, non-substantive differences in
format or layout between the copies.
Every day, estate and trust litigators confront
the issues of validity of wills and powers
of attorney. It is highly relevant, therefore, to
consider these recent legislative responses to
COVID-19 which may alter the positions parties
choose to take in estate litigation, and indeed,
the “urgency” with which matters may proceed
on the Estates List.
Overall, cooperation, communication and common
sense (the aforementioned “3-C’s” of the
Commercial List) have always been the standard
expected of counsel practising on the Commercial
and Estates Lists, and I think in general, COVID-19
has demonstrated just how essential these principles
truly are to the efficient and just resolution of
complex matters on this specialized List.
Conclusion
The authors’ overall take is to be optimistic. In
a time of unprecedented disruption of our daily
routines as counsel, the bars in which we each
practise appear, on balance, to be adapting to
change and continuing to serve our clients in
the manner expected of us in society. Where
holes exist in the process available to us, collegiality
(which might have been a fourth “C” of
Commercial List practice) is useful in serving the
interests of justice – and in my experience, this
is the overwhelming trend in the COVID-19 era.
It may seem premature to say this, as the pandemic
is not yet over, but the authors hope the
positive changes we have seen in the bar as a
result of COVID-19, and the practical approach
to practice and process, continues into the future
and beyond the return to business as usual.
Perhaps as a profession, we will exit this
unusual time having learned some things and
improved our practice and professionalism.
12 13

END OF TERM DINNER TM 2020
Step 1: Trim those bangs
Step 2: Put Your Look Together
#LawProm2020:
what will you wear?
Tamara Ramsey, Dale & Lessmann LLP
For the End of Term Dinner 2020, also known
on social media as #LawProm2020 and
#EOTD2020, the question is not so much about
what you will wear, but will you wear pants?
While many members dust off and press their
formal wear for this annual event, others
sometimes indulge in a new outfit. For many
brave litigators, the End of Term Dinner normally
involves uncomfortable footwear and
outfits that pinch or poke. Everyone looks fabulous
and feels glamorous.
This year will be different. The End of Term
Dinner is going virtual. The Advocates’ Society
has moved the formal program to webcast and
the After-Party to Zoom. And, for the first time,
mute all the members during the speeches and
no line up at the bar!
Though gowning is not required for electronic
hearings, some formality is still required. Similarly,
though heels and pants are not required for
the End of Term Dinner, surely some formality
will still be welcome. Members still need to dress
for the event. Will you steam the top half of your
tuxedo? Do you still remember how to tie a tie?
Will you adorn yourself with extra bling? Will
you pull that reliable knit dress out of the back
of your closet? Share your tips and photos using
the hashtags #LawProm2020 or #EOTD2020
Step 3: Pose for your
#LawProm Photo
Step 4:
Log on and enjoy the show
Top tips for getting ready for EOT@Home
from Past President Mike Eizenga
End of Term 2020 | Thursday, June 11, 2020
6:00 pm ET - 7:00 pm ET | (Virtual After-Party to follow)
Via Webcast | Gala Wear Optional
REGISTER FOR EOT@HOME
LEARN MORE
14 15

SECTION TITLE
10+ PROGRAM UPDATE
Management for Litigators
Kathryn Bird,
Hicks Morley Hamilton Stewart Storie LLP
The third installment of The Litigator’s Guide To the Business of Law series was held virtually on
May 6, 2020 to an audience of over 70 attendees. The focus of the session was managing the business
side of the legal practice during the COVID-19 pandemic and I was pleased to provide insights
and answer questions as a panelist along with Clarence Lui, Reain Lui Stock, Timothy Zimmerman,
RSM Canada, and Hilary Book, Book Law.
Clarence Lui provided the attendees with
learnings he has taken from managing his law
firm remotely, including the need to be flexible
with staff, the importance of data and information
security when working remotely,
and the need to ensure connectivity between
members of the firm.
I reviewed various areas of employment law
that are engaged as a result of the current
remote work environment and the (hopefully)
upcoming return to office environments,
including the application of the Human Rights
Code to remote work arrangements; awareness
of the rise of discrimination and harassment
targeted to persons of Asian descent, the
differently-abled and senior citizens; and risks
of constructive dismissal claims.
Timothy Zimmerman reviewed the various
government programs available to support
law firms and their employees during this time,
including wage subsidies, rent supports, and
loans. Timothy explained the various eligibility
requirements for these programs and how
they might be accessed by law firms.
Finally, Hilary Book reviewed the supports
available from the Law Society of Ontario and
LawPro to ensure that lawyers are complying
with practice obligations during these exceptional
times.
The panelists received questions from the audience
on a variety of issues, including eligibility
for the Canadian Emergency Relief Benefit.
It was a well-attended and informative session.
We are looking forward to the next installment
from the 10+ Committee.
16 17

SECTION TITLE
10+ STANDING COMMITTEE EVENT REPORT
Report on The Litigator’s
Guide to the Business of Law
Andrea Gonsalves, Stockwoods LLP
On February 12, 2020, the 10+ Standing Committee presented the second installment in its series
“The Litigator’s Guide to the Business of Law”. The event, which was hosted by Arbitration
Place, focused on the perennial question for many mid-career litigators: to incorporate or not
to incorporate? The panel also discussed various tax issues that arise for law firms of all sizes
as well as sole practitioners.
The panel was comprised of Deborah Templer of McCarthy Tétrault LLP, who offered the
perspective of a partner at a large firm; Daniel
Schwartz of Thornton Grout Finnigan LLP, who
brought his perspective as a partner in a midsize
firm; and Dal Deol, Senior Tax manager
with KPMG Enterprise in Toronto, who shared
his expertise in tax planning based on his frequent
advice to lawyers. The panelists offered
their views on the benefits and drawbacks for
litigators of practising through professional corporations,
including financial considerations,
administrative requirements, set-up and recurring
costs, and Law Society requirements.
Those in attendance at the event learned that
one of the potential advantages of incorporating
is the Federal small business tax deduction. However,
the benefits of that deduction depend to a
large extent on the number of partners at the firm
who practise through professional corporations.
Dal Deol provided a useful handout to illustrate
the potential tax savings of incorporating and the
impact of the small business deduction under different
scenarios.The discussion was lively, with
attendees asking a number of questions.
Setting up a professional corporation comes
with a cost and isn’t necessarily the right decision
for every lawyer. The main message was
that incorporating can have benefits, but the
extent of any benefits depends on a number of
factors. Those who are considering incorporating
should seek advice from an accountant to
assess whether it is the right decision in their
personal circumstances.
There was plenty of opportunity before and
after the panel for those who attended to mingle
over drinks and delicious food. Thanks
to Arbitration Place for sponsoring this event.
Learn more about the May 6 installment in the
series in this issue of Advocacy Matters.
18 19

ROUNDTABLE ON MENTORSHIP
Your Case Can Be
Strengthened With
Our Expertise
The right information leads to successful action.
Navigate disputes or transactions with clarity and
confidence by tapping into the insights and expertise
provided by MNP’s Valuation, Forensics and Litigation
Support Services professionals.
Jacklyn Davies, CPA, CA, CFF, DIFA
B.C. Leader, Forensics and Litigation Support
T: 604.637.1597
E: jacklyn.davies@mnp.ca
Michael Sileika, CPA, CA, CBV
National Leader, Valuations and Litigation Support
T: 604.637.1585
E: michael.sileika@mnp.ca
Proud to be recognized in the 2019 Canadian Lawyers Reader’s
Choice for Forensic Accounting Services.
OUR
SERVICES
Litigation Support and Dispute Resolution
Financial Investigations
Digital Forensics and E-Discovery
Valuations for Business Transactions
Insurance Advisory Services
Expert Witness Services
Valuations for Financial Reporting
A Culture of Mentorship:
The Path of Trailblazers
and the Future of
our Profession
Compiled by Lionel Tupman, Tupman & Bloom LLP
with Emily Lawrence, Paliare Roland Rosenberg
Rothstein LLP, Bahaa Sunallah, Department of
Justice, Master Alexandre Kauffman,
Superior Court of Justice, Shane D’Souza,
McCarthy Tétrault LLP
Despite the diverse backgrounds and experiences of the lawyers featured in this roundtable, the
unifying thread is that mentorship is important to the legal profession. Each of the lawyers that I
interviewed for this roundtable demonstrates the successful results that can be achieved in the
growth and development of a lawyer who benefits from good mentorship.
21

Emily Lawrence
Emily Lawrence
Practice and Accomplishments: Emily has a
fascinating practice and has been active in The
Advocates’ Society for a number of years. Emily
started her career with Paliare Roland Rosenberg
Rothstein LLP as summer student in 2004
and joined the partnership in 2012. Emily is a
self-described “generalist” and believes that being
a generalist has given her opportunities for
growth as a lawyer which she would not otherwise
have enjoyed.
Emily’s favourite file was the Trinity Western
University case, on which Emily acted as pro bono
counsel for The Advocates’ Society as intervener.
Emily enjoyed engaging in broader discussions
with all counsel for the many intervenors involved
in this case. She remembers in particular
the professionalism in interactions as between
counsel during all stages of this matter.
Emily considers her most rewarding professional
accomplishment to be the publication of
the 2018 Edition of Administrative Law in Practice:
Principles and Advocacy, which Emily co-authored
with Justice Lorne Sossin of the Superior
Court of Justice (prior to his appointment in December,
2018). Emily wrote this book over the
span of a year, during vacations and weekends,
and after her young children went to sleep. The
experience was challenging and rewarding.
Emily notes that Justice Sossin was a generous
mentor and wonderful to work with.
Challenges: Emily had to overcome unique challenges
to get to where she is. For periods of her
childhood, Emily’s family lived at or near the poverty
line. Emily did not have any lawyers or professionals
in her family growing up, although her
father became a doctor later in life. Emily entered
law school with little experience with professional
environments. Emily’s firm has a number of
first-generation lawyers, and she encountered a
supportive and educational environment, mostly
as a result of role modeling and lots of client
contact with other lawyers whom she was able
to observe. Emily learned to be the professional
she is by watching other lawyers.
Mentors and Mentoring: Emily said that it was
very hard to choose a “greatest mentor” among
the partners at her firm, especially her women
partner role models, and other lawyers outside
her firm. Linda Rothstein and Megan Shortreed
were exceptional mentors to Emily during her
early years of practice. They identified Emily’s
interest in professional regulation, and Linda
mentored her during several long cases. Emily
also values Linda’s advice on navigating work
and parenting commitments. In recent years,
Robert Centa, Paliare Roland’s current managing
partner, has mentored Emily both as an advocate
and in her leadership role running the
student program.
Emily describes mentorship as a “necessity”.
She believes that she would not have been able
to achieve what she has, or indeed, even become
a lawyer without support and guidance
of people from inside and outside of her firm.
Emily believes that the hardest part of lawyering
is developing good judgment; having good
mentors allows one to develop good judgment.
As she notes: “Mentorship is what gets people
through the day and what gets people through
life in the profession.”
Bahaa Sunallah
Practice & Accomplishments: Bahaa was called
to the bar in February 2000. He currently practices
as a lawyer with the Department of Justice.
Bahaa always wanted to be involved in legal education,
and so approximately 2 years into his
practice, Bahaa started teaching at Algonquin
College’s law clerk program. He continued to
Bahaa Sunallah
develop as a teacher and went on to teach constitutional
law and equality rights at Carleton
University and, most recently, at the University
of Ottawa Faculty of Law.
Bahaa does not consider himself a trailblazer,
but he recalls his innovation in 2007 when he
started teaching law through video/television
media to his students at Carleton. Bahaa took
particular pride in this innovation because it
allowed his young son (who was 1 at the time)
to see him on a TV screen was the fun of it all
“…just looking at his eyes watching me in two
places at the same time, behind and in front of
the screen.” As his children grew, he hoped this
would instill in them the value and importance
of schooling and higher education. Teaching and
practising as a lawyer with the DOJ kept Bahaa
busy and he recalls that his schedule required
him to practice all day; prepare for teaching
during free moments on Saturdays, Sundays,
Mondays and Tuesdays; and teach on Wednesdays
and Thursdays. Recently, Bahaa won an
22 23

in and they gave me a chance”.
Master Alexandre Kaufman
Shane D’Souza
Challenges: Discussing challenges he faced
in obtaining his success, Master Kaufman remarked
“[t]he practice of law requires you to
dedicate yourself to it if you want to be good. It
is a calling. You can aim to excel, or you can be
mediocre. The challenge is to do that and balance
life with children. It is a very demanding,
very stressful job. Raising a family and being a
good father and husband is a constant balance
while attempting to develop your career.”
excellence in teaching award for his work as a
part-time professor at the University of Ottawa
Faculty of Law. Bahaa attributes and dedicates
his success to his spouse and children.
Challenges: When Bahaa was called to the bar,
he had a hard time initially finding work as an
associate. Ultimately, he opened a practice as a
sole practitioner. He recalls how difficult it was,
at first, for him to find work, but building upon
the skills he developed at the legal aid clinic as
an articling student, Bahaa continued to practise
human rights, poverty and administrative
law. Bahaa took on cases for people who simply
could not afford to hire a lawyer elsewhere.
Mentors and Mentoring: Bahaa believes mentorship
is essential. He comments that he has
been made better as a professional by other
people around him – whether in his capacity
as a teacher or as a DOJ lawyer. Bahaa states,
“people have paid it forward with me, and I do
the same to others”.
Around 2 years into practice, Bahaa discussed
the role of a DOJ lawyer with friends and decided
he was interested in learning more. However,
Bahaa did not know any DOJ lawyers with
whom he could speak, so he started “cold-calling”
lawyers at the DOJ to inquire about their
work and any potential job openings.
Everyone who answered the phone was very
helpful to Bahaa and offered him information
about a career with the DOJ. Ultimately, one of
the phone calls he placed turned into a job offer.
As Bahaa puts it, “someone gave [him] a
chance”. Bahaa says that has continued to happen
throughout his career: people give him “a
chance”, and he always seizes the opportunity.
Bahaa’s dedication to teaching and mentoring
is attributable to his passion for, as he puts it,
“paying it forward”. Bahaa is a strong believer
in mentorship, particularly because he has benefitted
from it personally and has seen, firsthand,
the importance of mentorship to the profession.
He has helped people because he has
been helped all along.
Master Kaufman
Practice & Accomplishments: Master Alexandre
Kaufman was appointed to the bench as a
Case Management Master in December 2018,
and currently sits on the Superior Court of Justice
in Ottawa.
Prior to his appointment, Master Kaufman enjoyed
an interesting career in practice as a prosecutor
and civil litigator for the DOJ. He taught
trial advocacy for a year at the University of Ottawa
Faculty of Law and he taught Civil Procedure
for a number of years as an instructor at
Algonquin College in the paralegal program.
Master Kaufman’s move from civil litigation to
criminal prosecution was, he advises, a steep
learning curve. However, as he says, “I jumped
Mentors & Mentoring: Master Kaufman notes
he was lucky to have a few people in his career
to take the time and interest in him to contribute
to his knowledge, and teach him to care
about credibility, advocacy and ethics. He recalls,
for example, two lawyers who were directors
of the civil litigation section of the DOJ. In
particular, Master Kaufman worked very closely
for a number of years with a senior lawyer who
came to the DOJ by executive interchange from
Ogilvy Renault LLP. Master Kaufman received
mentorship from him on advocacy, how to pursue
it vigorously and not lose credibility, how to
be a compelling advocate, and how to effectively
manage his time.
Master Kaufman highlighted the importance
of “active menteeship” – in other words, asking
for help as a mentee if you need it, and taking
criticism and learning from it. In any circumstance
in this profession, Master Kaufman views
mentorship as essential to success.
Shane D’Souza
Practice & Accomplishments: Shane D’Souza
has practiced at McCarthy Tetrault LLP since his
call to the bar in 2010. He primarily practises
in the areas of securities litigation, shareholder
disputes, wealth litigation and internal investigations,
although he has also done consider-
24 25

no lawyers and no one in Ontario. He had no
social or professional network whatsoever, and
consequently he had to work extremely hard to
develop himself personally and professionally.
able trial work in medical malpractice and professional
regulation prosecutions.
Shane was born and raised in Pakistan. He
came to Canada as a third-year international
undergraduate student.
Challenges: Shane’s struggles and challenges
in becoming a lawyer and achieving his current
success were significant. To begin with, he knew
Mentors & Mentoring: Shane credits his success
at McCarthy’s in his early days to his finding
an excellent mentor: Eric Block took an early
interest in Shane and mentored him. He continued
to mentor Shane over the years, and assisted
him in developing skills in the practice of law
including developing his professional network.
Shane told me, “imagine someone without
connections, amongst 27 other very qualified
students, some of whom knew people at the
firm already, and had professional or personal
connections in the legal industry. It feels
like you’re starting from behind. You really
need someone to say, ‘you belong here, you
fit in.’ This is what Eric and others at my firm
did for me.”
Shane observes: “Mentorship is arguably the
most important component to building a career
in law. Law school equips you with some important
but pretty basic tools. Mentors help you
apply those tools, and acquire and master new
tools, to solve complex problems. Mentors also
provide direct, timely and constructive criticism.
McCarthy’s has a culture of ongoing informal
and formal feedback, which was important to
me since I got to adjust real-time.”
The Common Thread
Law is a difficult career, to be sure, perhaps
as much due to the interpersonal and personal
pressures, including time management
and work-life balance, as the technical
challenges of practice. The common thread
which runs throughout the stories of interviewees
is that each lawyer has benefitted
from mentorship, and they all wish to “pay
it forward”. A culture of mentorship is, undoubtedly,
something this profession should
aim to achieve. In this way, whether mentor
or mentee, we will all benefit.
Small screen
BIG ADVOCACY
Class Actions Advocacy
Tuesday, June 9, 2020 | 9:00 am - 12:00 pm ET | Webcast
Hear from top class action practitioners about trends and
strategies for bringing and defending a class action.
Topics Include:
• Lightning Round: The Year in Review
• The View From Here: A Primer on Class Actions in America
• Fireside Chat with a Class Actions Judge
• Access to Justice? Comparative Class Action Litigation
• Multi-jurisdictional Class Actions
Program Chairs:
Laura K. Fric, Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
Margaret L. Waddell, Waddell Phillips PC
You were born to advocate so don’t stop
honing your craft just because you can’t
be in the courtroom.
Register
For more information, including a full list
of faculty and accreditation information,
click here.
26 27

@HomeAdvocate
@HomeAdvocate is here to provide you - our members - with regular updates
on what is happening at TAS and in our profession while we navigate the
‘new normal’ and work to enhance and promote two noble characteristics of
our profession - communication and collegiality. Stay tuned. Stay safe.
Past Issues:
May 11, 2020 @HomeAdvocate
May 4, 2020 @HomeAdvocate
TAS REPORT - TORONTO
Report on Mid-Career
Women’s Social
Sumeet (Sonu) Dhanju-Dhillon, Torkin Manes LLP
April 27, 2020 @HomeAdvocate
April 20, 2020 @HomeAdvocate
April 13, 2020 @HomeAdvocate
www.advocates.ca
The 10+ Committee hosted its second successful Mid-Career Women’s Social on March 3, 2020.
More than 70 women came together in a beautiful space at Leña to build relationships and share
experiences over drinks and delicious food.
The event provided an opportunity for the Society’s mid-career female litigators to come
together to network, discuss the unique challenges they face and share creative solutions to
many of those challenges. It was also a great opportunity to grow relationships and learn from
one another’s collective experiences.
Until next year’s event, we can daydream about how nice it would be to be in a room together
with such lovely company! Thank you to our sponsors PwC, ZSA Legal Recruitment and
Vanderschoot Family Law.
28 29

Small screen
BIG ADVOCACY
Privilege: A Litigator’s Guide
Tuesday, June 16, 2020 | 1:00 pm - 4:30 pm ET | Webcast
All litigators must be well-versed in how to protect privilege
for their clients and how to challenge questionable claims
of privilege by opposing parties.
Topics Include:
• Types of Privilege
• Waiver of Privilege
• Privilege Updates and Hot Topics
• Privilege and Technology
• Dealing with Inadvertent Disclosure
• When and How to Challenge Privilege
Program Chairs:
Dominique T. Hussey, Bennett Jones LLP
Megan E. Shortreed,
Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP
SECTION COVID-19TITLE
In this Together?
Not Really.
Yola S. Ventresca, Lerners LLP
You were born to advocate so don’t stop
honing your craft just because you can’t
be in the courtroom.
Register
For more information, including a full list
of faculty and accreditation information,
click here.
In social media spheres and in the declarations of politicians and public health officials, the rallying
cry for confronting the global pandemic caused by COVID-19 conveys a deceptively simple and
rosy message: we’re all #InThisTogether.
Except that we’re not; not really. Women from a wide range of socio-economic and cultural backgrounds
disproportionately are bearing the brunt of this utterly unprecedented and truly historic
pandemic that has brought about a social and economic lockdown never before seen.
And for all the saccharine talk of social solidarity in the era of social distancing, the fact is that,
30 31

as Katherine Scott of the Canadian Centre for
Policy Alternatives puts it, COVID-19 “is not an
equal-opportunity pandemic.” This is especially
true for women-at-risk and for women from
low-resourced or racialized backgrounds.
Even before the COVID crisis, women on average
did four hours of unpaid work at home
– laundry, groceries, childcare – for every 2.5
hours done by men. The pressures and expectations
of staying at home while also working
from home in the COVID era have introduced
new and unforeseen stressors into the lives of
working women. Pressures to home-school,
for instance, and increased demands for daily
cooking and cleaning. Such stressors are exacerbated
by the collapse of the usual support
systems – schooling, day care, extended
family childcare help – that made professional
work outside the home feasible for many in
the first place.
I have heard from many female lawyers from
families where both partners are now expected
to work productively and efficiently from home
that the equitable distribution of domestic responsibilities
– to the extent that it ever existed
– is falling into serious disequilibrium. In heterosexual
relationships where the male partner
earns more or works in a sector of the economy
that requires more frequent and longer conference
calls, for instance, women may find themselves
scurrying to keep kids occupied and quiet.
Again, all without the usual support systems or
outlets – outdoor sports and playdates, for instance
– that normally make it possible for us to
work effectively and to our own high standards.
Keeping the pace has meant boundary-less days,
with women squeezing work in anytime that it is
feasible – be it in the early hours of the morning,
late at night or on weekends.
Any sense of “work-life balance” has been
obliterated by the double demand to stay at
home and also to work from home, as if everything
were normal.
Little wonder then that the situation is exacting
a serious if underreported mental health crisis
among working women in various sectors.
Women generally have high standards for
themselves and may find it hard to back away
from household responsibilities, especially in the
area of childcare. These unattainable standards
are the result of inequitable societal norms and
pressures that unfairly place the emotional and
material labour of the family squarely on the
shoulders of women. What then, from a practical
perspective, is to be done?
I have no concrete solutions to offer. To the
extent possible, take time for self-care routines.
Keep to a daily routine; reclaim time and space
in your home for quiet, solitary reflection; try
to rest; try to pay attention to a healthy diet
and regular exercise. Practise saying no to demands
at work or at home that add undue and
untenable pressures. These are not easy solutions
and not feasible for everyone. They are,
however, a starting point for discussion. For
my part, I have tried to let go of the pressure
of homeschooling. There is more screen time.
There are more movies. There is unstructured
play. I’m trying hard to put aside the unrealistic
standards to which I usually hold myself with
respect to household labour.
I want to end with an important note for
women in leadership positions. Be an advocate,
a voice, for your junior colleagues and
peers. Acknowledge openly the anxieties and
pressures of the current moment – and do so
on behalf of your team. In the months and
years to come we as a profession are going
to need a sustained and serious discussion
about what the COVID crisis means for women
on partnership track, for women whose
billable hours and earnings are going to be
disproportionately impacted by this historic
pandemic. These will not be easy conversations
and there are no simple solutions. Right
now, however, there is something you can do
- make it okay to say that we’re not okay, that
not all is well. And be there to listen.
32 33

QUIRKY SECTION CASE TITLE
Quirky Case, The Revenge
of the Comma: Austin v. Bell
Canada, 2020 ONCA 142
Tamara Ramsey, Dale & Lessmann LLP
This column features a case that is interesting because of its quirkiness. This can include unusual
facts, a novel legal issue, or something else that makes it quirky.
In a recent issue, I wrote about the million-dollar comma in Austin v. Bell Canada, 2019 ONSC
4757. The comma was, in fact, worth over $10 million in the first year and, over the long-term, over
$100 million. In a decision that focussed not just on the comma, but on fundamental principles
of contract interpretation, the Ontario Court of Appeal allowed an appeal regarding the indexing
provisions of a Bell Canada pension plan.
The interpretation of the provision
at issue starts with the
language (and punctuation)
in s. 1.29 of the pension plan,
which provides that “‘Pension
Index’ means the annual percentage
increase of the Consumer
Price Index, as determined
by statistics Canada,
during the period from…” The
ONCA agreed that, on its face,
s. 1.29 states that both the annual
percentage increase and
the Consumer Price Index are
to be determined by Statistics
Canada. This plain meaning is
supported by the “series qualifying
rule”, which, as a reminder,
provides that where there
is a comma at the end of a sequence
of items, a phrase that
follows that comma will modify
all items in the list.
The analysis by the ONCA did
not stop with the plain meaning
of s.1.29 and continued to the
next stage: reading s. 1.29 in
the context of the pension plan
as a whole. Though the ONCA
agreed that a pension scheme
should be interpreted as a
whole and that the meaning of
a particular clause should be
considered in conjunction with
other relevant clauses, it held
that the motion judge made
a palpable or overriding error
or an extricable error of law in
holding that the plain meaning
of s. 1.29 would render another
section “meaningless” or
“partly meaningless”.
First, the motion judge’s conclusion
ignored some uncontradicted
evidence that gave
meaning to one of the subsections
in the section in question.
The failure to apply the
evidence to the interpretation
of the pension plan was a palpable
and overriding error of
fact. The error was plain to see
and therefore palpable and
overriding because it determined
the result.
Second, the motion judge
made an extricable error in law
in concluding that the section
in question would be rendered
“partly meaningless”. The ONCA
held that it is not apparent what
“partly meaningless” means. A
contractual provision either has
meaning or it does not.
Alternatively, the ONCA held
that the motion judge made an
extricable error of law by failing
to consider the contra proferentem
rule upon finding the
wording of the pension plan to
be “awkward”. Since the plan
was drafted by Bell without
meaningful participation by the
pensioners, the contra proferentem
rule would have resolved
ambiguities in the pension documents
in favour of the pensioners.
Though the plan was
not ambiguous, the trial judge’s
finding that the plan was “awkward”
was a short step to finding
the wording ambiguous
such that the judge should have
taken that step and applied the
contra proferentum doctrine.
Failure to do so represented an
extricable error of law.
34 35

The Alberta Excellence in Mentoring Award
Congratulations to Oliver Ho, Jensen Shawa Solomon Duguid Hawkes LLP. The
Alberta Excellence in Mentoring Award is presented to an advocate who
shows commitment to mentoring young advocates in Alberta.
The Douglas K. Laidlaw Medal for Excellence in Advocacy
Congratulations to Sarit E. Batner, McCarthy Tétrault LLP. The Douglas K. Laidlaw
Medal for Excellence in Advocacy is awarded for excellence in advocacy to
an advocate in his or her middle years of practice.
The Eric Hoaken Excellence in Mentoring Award
Congratulations to Ranjan K. Agarwal, Bennett Jones LLP. The Eric Hoaken
Excellence in Mentoring Award honours advocates who have shown
outstanding commitment to and excellence in mentoring other advocates.
The John P. Nelligan Award for Excellence in Advocacy
Congratulations to Richard G. Dearden, Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP. The
John P. Nelligan Award for Excellence in Advocacy is presented to an
advocate who exemplifies excellence in advocacy in Ottawa.
JOURNAL REVIEW: THEN AND NOW
Looking Back:
The State of Professionalism
Today v. David Stockwood’s
View in 1997
Christine Vanderschoot, Vanderschoot Family Law
The Advocates’ Society Award for Excellence in Teaching
Congratulations to Brian Grant, Brian Grant Mediation. The Advocates’ Society
Award for Excellence in Teaching honours those who have made an
outstanding contribution in the classroom and to the profession.
Members of The Advocates’ Society are, and always have been, leaders in their profession – both inside
and outside the courtroom. Our awards recognize the very best.
In the 1997 Autumn Issue of The Advocates Society Journal, David Stockwood wrote about the
decline of professionalism as he saw it. He shares that he was inspired by reading of Alan Lenczner’s
experiences when appearing in the English Court of Appeal. Lenczner reported what appears to
Stockwood as a higher level of professionalism. This comparison, while based upon one counsel’s
personal experience and reporting, triggered something in Stockwood that we can likely all relate
to in our own practice some 23 years later. Is professionalism still on the decline, or have positive
strides been made since Stockwood’s article?
To learn more about our awards, click here.
36 37

Answering that question is difficult and highly
subjective, as it will be based for the most part
on our individual experience. But there seem to
be common threads running through the writings
of judges and lawyers alike informing us
that we still have room to improve civility within
the profession. Negative trends have developed,
unfortunately, and bad habits as well as
insufficient or improper mentoring can contribute
to a decline in professionalism being passed
from senior to junior counsel ad infinitum.
As Stockwood points out, “If someone writes
to you saying that they are ‘outraged’ by your
behaviour, it is not necessary to write back
saying that you are outraged by their outrage.”
We have all encountered this type of invective
writing on files, and, at least speaking for myself
in my more junior days of practice, I did
not know how to respond and sought advice
from senior counsel. Looking back, I see that
just like Stockwood who was mentored by John
Robinette and Charles Dubin, I was fortunate
to have the sage advice of first Anita Kain and
then Kelly Jordan, both pillars of restraint and
skilled mentors (I hope they, in turn, believe I
was a good mentee).
Stockwood notes that “[l]itigation has always
been a stressful profession…” but that “[i]t is
ironic that this stress leads to acrimonious relationships
between counsel, which in turn adds
to the stress of the practice.” This is an accepted
truth; every now and then our continuing legal
education programs will include a refresher
on essentially how to behave toward our colleagues,
and I do not believe I have ever seen
a judge’s “Top 10” comments on what they like/
dislike in a courtroom that has not mentioned
their annoyance at counsel who showboat,
bicker, continuously interrupt or otherwise display
a lack of professionalism during a hearing.
The Advocates’ Society’s Principles of Civility for
Advocates sets out detailed guidance for proper
behaviour by counsel and calls on lawyers
to “always be courteous and civil” to one another.
The Law Society of Ontario’s Rules of
Professional Conduct are clear that counsel
must not “over-identify” with their clients, potentially
leading to overly aggressive behaviour
or incivility. In extreme cases, this can lead to
sanctions against the lawyer for their unprofessional
conduct. In family law cases, many of
the issues can be emotionally charged. In the
LSUC v. Ludmer case, one of the counsel was
accused of unacceptably aggressive behaviour
due to over-identifying with the client. The presiding
adjudicator put it this way: “The issues
can lead clients and lawyers to feel passionately,
particularly when we have our own histories.
However, clients will not be well served if
lawyers cannot work together…We must separate
clients’ views from those of lawyers…”
Another recent case of note is Groia v. Law
Society of Upper Canada. This case resonated
throughout the legal profession. We all likely
recall that during a complex trial, the prosecution
filed an application to have Joseph Groia
removed as defence counsel for reasons of perceived
misconduct. Mr. Groia remained on the
case, but later had to defend himself in a Law
Society disciplinary proceeding which wound its
way to the Supreme Court. During that process
the SCC recognized that incivility is “…inherently
contextual and fact-specific.” The court noted
that trials are “often hard fought” and “not tea
parties.” Mr. Groia was eventually successful in
his appeal, and he was also successful in bringing
once again to the fore the debate between
counsel and judges as to what does and does
not cross the line. As counsel, perhaps the best
adage we can strive for is to treat the other side
the way we would expect and want to be treated,
while taking all steps we deem reasonable
and necessary in our job as advocates.
Perhaps not as prevalent or widely talked
about in Stockwood’s time but receiving more
attention today is the issue of mental health in
the practice of law. Lawyers need to be aware
of potential mental health issues that can affect
their clients’ behaviour; in extreme cases, clients’
mental health issues can affect their ability to
understand and participate in litigation, including
giving instructions to counsel. Management
of these types of situations necessarily falls to
counsel, and guidelines are provided in Rule 3.2-
9 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
Counsel, perhaps particularly those practicing
with families in matrimonial cases, must remember
that their actions and words can influence
how their clients view the justice system. This
can be a heavy burden to bear, especially when
dealing with difficult personalities or issues and
striving for the best outcome for one’s client. My
experience has taught me—as, it seems, David
Stockwood’s taught him— that fraught situations
are rarely if ever made better by negative
escalation; we must strive to demonstrate civility
in the face of adversity and lead by good
behaviour. Perhaps now more than ever, during
this strange time of pandemic and the workarounds
and stressors that have come with that,
counsels’ duty to civility may be truly tested.
38 39

REMOTE SECTION ADVOCACY
TITLE
Never Waste a Crisis:
Ontario Courts Go Virtual
with the Best Practices for
Remote Hearings
Brent J. Arnold, Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP
“Never waste a crisis,” President Obama’s Chief-of-Staff Rahm Emanuel once said. When COVID-19
closed Ontario’s courts to in-person hearings, the courts moved quickly to take hearings online—
not just for now, but for the future too. And while the first Zoom hearings proceeded at various levels
of court, The Advocates’ Society, together with
the Ontario Bar Association, the Federation
of Ontario Law Associations, and the Ontario
Trial Lawyers’ Association, established an
E-Hearings Task Force to work with the Ontario
Superior Court of Justice to expand virtual
access to the courts. (The 10+ demographic
had a seat at Task Force table as well: I served
as one of TAS’s representatives on the Task
Force, while fellow 10+ advocates Allison Speigel
and Kristin Muszynski represented the
OBA and FOLA.)
The Task Force’s work culminated in the May
13, 2020 release of the Best Practices for Remote
Hearings, a thorough guide to remote proceedings
that spans issues ranging from technical
details to the logistics and ethics of presenting
cases virtually. The guide sets out detailed instructions
for preparing for hearings, makes
hardware and software recommendations to
make hearings go smoother, and provides resources
for self-represented litigants. Appendices
to the Best Practices include checklists to
assist counsel in planning remote hearings and
setting up their gear to make the best possible
impression. These checklists are also downloadable
in Word from the TAS Best Practice
Publications splash page.
As Chief Justice Morawetz noted in his April 6,
2020 Fireside Chat for The Advocates’ Society,
“we cannot go back” to the way we practiced
pre-COVID-19, and we will not be reverting to
in-person attendances for all aspects of civil
files. He observed, “the challenges are there,
but there’s also some great opportunities” in
the embrace of technology in the Court’s practice.
TAS is proud to have assisted the Court
and the profession in making the most of difficult
times by pivoting to new ways of doing the
bench and bar’s business.
40 41

The Litigator’s Guide To the Business of Law
February 12, 2020 | Arbitration Place, Toronto
The Mid-Career Women’s Social
March 3, 2020 | Leña Restaurante, Toronto
Dal Deol, KPMG LLP, Daniel Schwartz, Thornton Grout Finnigan LLP, Deborah Templer, McCarthy Tétrault LLP, Andrea Gonsalves, Stockwoods LLP
42 43

Virtual Fitness With TAS
April 17, 2020 | Webcast
Small screen
BIG ADVOCACY
Litigating Contract Disputes
Thursday, June 18, 2020 | 9:00 am - 12:00 pm ET | Webcast
What are the key considerations when bringing or defending
a contract claim? When is the factual matrix relevant and
admissible? What are best practices when attempting to
prove or refute an oral contract? When and how should
counsel involve an expert? What are the latest tips for effective
advocacy in contract cases? Our esteemed panelists will
discuss these issues and more at Litigating Contract Disputes.
10+ Standing Committee Meeting
April 21, 2020 | Webcast
Topics Include:
• Framing Your Contract Claim
• Drafting Effective Pleadings in Contract Disputes
• Gathering the Evidence to Win a Contract Case
• Proving (and Challenging) the Existence of Oral Contracts
• The Use of Experts in Contractual Disputes
• Contracts in the Courtroom: Tips for
Presenting and Testing Evidence at Trial
Program Chairs:
Geoff R. Hall, McCarthy Tétrault LLP
Linda Galessiere, Camelino Galessiere LLP
You were born to advocate so don’t stop
honing your craft just because you can’t be
in the courtroom.
Register
For more information, including a full list
of faculty and accreditation information,
click here.
44 45

Small screen
BIG ADVOCACY
Virtual Yoga With TAS
April 21, 2020 | Webcast
Objection, Your Honour!
Tuesday, June 23, 2020 | 9:00 am - 12:00 pm ET | Webcast
Objections are not just for the courtroom. Whether you’re
participating in a remote hearing or a discovery, there are
nuanced and skillful ways you can and should object outside
of the courtroom. In this remote live program, learn when,
why and how to make effective objections, inside and outside
the courtroom.
Our seasoned faculty of litigators and judges will share their
expertise to help you master the art of objections.
Program Chairs:
Jennifer L. McAleer, Fasken
Paul Steep, McCarthy Tétrault LLP
Faculty Includes:
The Honourable Justice Peter Cavanagh,
Superior Court of Justice
The Honourable Justice Darla Wilson,
Superior Court of Justice
You were born to advocate so don’t stop
honing your craft just because you can’t
be in the courtroom.
Register
For more information, including a full list
of faculty and accreditation information,
click here.
46 47

Spring Symposium: The Civil Advocate
April 29, 2020 | Webcast
Spring Symposium: The Skilled Advocate
May 5, 2020 | Webcast
Shantona Chaudhury, Pape Chaudhury LLP
The Hon. Justice David H. Doherty, Court of Appeal for Ontario
Tom Curry, LSM, Lenczner Slaght
The Hon. Justice David H. Doherty,
Court of Appeal for Ontario
The Hon. Justice Bonnie R. Warkentin, Superior Court of Justice
48 49
The Hon. Justice Mahmud Jamal, Court of Appeal for Ontario
The Hon. Justice Nicholas Kasirer, Cour Suprême Du Canada
The Hon. Eleanore A. Cronk, ASM
Sonia Bjorkquist, Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP

The Litigator’s Guide To the Business of Law
May 6, 2020 | Webcast
Spring Symposium: The Well-Informed Advocate
May 7, 2020 | Webcast
Kathryn J. Manning,
DMG Advocates LLP
Marie-Andrée Vermette,
WeirFoulds LLP
Audrey Boctor,
IMK S.e.n.c.r.l./LLP
Nader R. Hasan, Stockwoods LLP
Kathryn J. Bird, Hicks Morley Hamilton Stewart Storie LLP
Clarence Lui, Reain Lui Stock
Anne M. Turley,
Department of Justice
Sandra A. Forbes, Davies Ward
Phillips & Vineberg LLP
Nadia Effendi,
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
Julian K. Roy, Ministry of the
Attorney General
Hilary Book, Book Law
Timothy Zimmerman, RSM Canada
Summary Judgment Motions
May 28, 2020 | Webcast
The Hon. Justice Jessica A. Kimmel, Superior Court of Justice
Luisa Ritacca, Stockwoods LLP
50 51
The Hon. Justice Glenn A. Hainey, Superior Court of Justice
The Hon. Justice Fred Myers, Superior Court of Justice
Kathleen Flynn Peterson, Ciresi Conlin LLP

Work from Home Photos
TAS wants to see your kids and creatures too! Post your Work From Home photos Twitter
using #TASwfh and we may feature you in the next Advocacy Matters issue.
52 53

54
www.advocates.ca