4 Ontario Universities seek approval to open a law School!

In what is incredible news, the Toronto Star reported that Lakehead, Waterloo and Laurier are schools that are seeking approval to open law schools.

The complete text of the article may be found here:
http://www.thestar.com/article/417796

If approved, this will dramatically increase the number of places in Ontario law schools. Lakehead is proposing to open a law school to train lawyers for remote northern communities and to attract more aboriginal students to the law. The focus at Waterloo and Laurier is said to be on international law and intellectual property.

In any case, this is great news!

I will add more information as it becomes available.

Richardson LSAT - GMAT - GRE - MCAT Preparation Courses - Toronto, Canada
http://www.prep.com

Registration for the June 16, 2008 and October 4, 2008 LSATs is now open.

You are urged to register immediately. Registration for the Toronto and other major centers fills quickly.

http://www.lsac.org/LSAT/lsat-registration-methods.asp

The Case For The June LSAT:
http://www.prep.com/law/TheJuneLSAT.html

Queen's To Change LL.B. Degree To J.D.

It is looking as though Queen's will become the second Canadian law school to change its degree from the LL.B. (Bachelor of Laws) to the J.D. (Juris Doctor). The University of Toronto was the first Canadian law school to do this. It is also looking like the University of British Columbia will be the third.

It is important to note that neither the Queen's nor the University of Toronto J.D. is ABA (American Bar Association) approved.

To read more about this see the following:
http://law.queensu.ca/students/lss/jdProposal.html

The issue was even featured in the Globe and Mail:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20071114.LAW14/EmailTPStory/

Richardson - LSAT - GMAT - GRE - MCAT Preparation Courses - Toronto, Canada
http://www.prep.com

Should Lawyers Be Allowed To Regulate Themselves?

Philip Slayton, author of "Lawyers Gone Bad" has some interesting insights into this issue.

What follows is a recent article by Mr. Slayton. It is reproduced with his permission and he retains the copyright.

______________________________



"Why should lawyers be allowed to regulate themselves?



By PHILIP SLAYTON
Author of Lawyers Gone Bad

Friday, August 3, 2007



In Canada, lawyers are allowed to run the legal profession - an
institution essential to a democratic society - as they see fit. Their
"law societies" decide how their members will practise law. They
decide who gets to be a lawyer, what financial records must be kept,
how clients funds should be handled, how to maintain professional
competence, how to deal with conflicts of interest and how to
discipline a lawyer who goes bad. Lawyers are given this vast power by
provincial legislatures.

The only possible justification for this legislative gift is that it
is in the public interest. But is it?

The principle behind lawyer self-regulation is that lawyers have a
responsibility to protect citizens from the state, and they cannot do
that unless they are independent. If lawyers were regulated directly
by the state, so the argument goes, they would be subservient to it.
But, long ago, we figured out how to devise state institutions that
operate independently of government - any politician who has been
investigated by the police will attest to that. And the
self-regulatory ability of Canadian lawyers is a gift of the
provincial legislature, which can take it back tomorrow. The
independence argument is illusory.

The history of self-governance by the Canadian legal profession is
spotty, to say the least. It is full of uplifting statements by bar
association presidents, but little else. The disciplinary record is
erratic and unconvincing. In Quebec, for example, a woman named
Christina Finney complained to the Bar of Quebec about lawyer Eric
Belhassen in 1990. Complaints about Mr. Belhassen's conduct began in
1979, but he was not disbarred until 1998. In 2004, the Supreme Court
of Canada upheld an award of damages to Ms. Finney. In a unanimous
judgment, the court said "the attitude exhibited by the [Bar], in a
clearly urgent situation in which a practising lawyer represented a
real danger to the public, was one of ... negligence and indifference
... The very serious carelessness it displayed amounts to bad faith."

Perhaps most importantly, the profession has done little to promote
access to justice. It is a scandal that most Canadians lack recourse
to the law and the legal system, a vital part of government, because
they cannot afford to pay legal fees. It is as if the right to vote in
a general election were only given to those with an income above a
certain level.

Some other countries offer better approaches that Canada should emulate.

Most of our laws and legal institutions derive from those of the
United Kingdom. But even there, radical change is afoot in how lawyers
are regulated and legal services delivered. The principal figure in
this revolution is not some disaffected crank, but a quintessential
establishment man, Sir David Clementi, head of a huge insurance
company and former deputy governor of the Bank of England. In 2003,
the British Lord Chancellor asked Sir David to conduct a review of the
legal profession. His report and recommendations were incorporated
into the UK Legal Services Bill, now before the British Parliament.

Sir David said: "The current regulatory system is focused on those who
provide legal services: The new framework will place the interests of
consumers at its centre."

Two of his key recommendations are that the legal profession be
overseen by a new board, with a lay majority, chaired by a non-lawyer
and directly accountable to Parliament, and that the job of
investigating complaints against lawyers be taken away from the
profession and given to an independent office. It is worth noting that
the Clementi reforms have met little opposition from UK lawyers, and
complete indifference from the Canadian legal profession.

Some of the reforms are not particularly novel. The proposed
independent office to investigate complaints against lawyers closely
resembles the highly successful Office of the Legal Services
Commissioner in New South Wales, Australia. In the U.S., lawyers are
regulated by courts in many states. A professor at an English
university, who telephoned me this week about the controversy
developing in Canada, said that what is starting to happen here is
part of an international movement to reform governance of all
professions; it's just that Canada is a bit behind.

Law and the legal system belong not to the legal profession, but to
all Canadians. We can start in Ontario, where an election is coming.
Let's suggest to candidates for office that Ontario finds its own
David Clementi and takes a close look at governance of the legal
profession.

Philip Slayton, a former law

professor and dean, was a partner at a major Toronto law firm.

________________________________________________

Richardson - LSAT - GMAT - MCAT - GRE Preparation Courses - Toronto, Ontario
http://www.prep.com

The LSAT Fingerprint Controversy Becomes The LSAT Photograph Controversy

As many of you know, LSAT test takers in Canada are now required to submit a photograph, rather than submit a fingerprint. The information from Law Services states that:

“Notice for LSAT Registrants at Canadian Centers

Effective with the September 2007 Administration of the LSAT, candidates testing at test centers in Canada MUST bring a photograph to the test center on the day of the test. These photographs will be retained by LSAC.

You will need to print out a new test admission ticket from your LSAC online account after July 16 in order to comply with the following requirements. Tickets printed prior to July 16 will not be valid.

Before you report to the testing location, you must:

- Attach a recent, clear photograph of yourself to the designated box on your LSAT admission ticket. (The photograph must have been taken within the last six months and must show only your face and shoulders. Laminated copies and photocopies of your photo are not acceptable.)

- Print (in block letters) your name, test date, LSAC account number, and test center code on the back of the photograph before you glue it to the admission ticket in case it should become detached from your admission ticket.

- Your photograph should not be larger than 5x5 cm or smaller than 3x3 cm. It should fit within the designated box on your LSAT admission ticket.

- Glue or tape your photo to the ticket; do not use staples.

You MUST have a recent photograph attached to your LSAT admission ticket or you will not be admitted to the test. The photograph must be clear enough so that there is no doubt about your identity. Your face in the photo must show you as you look on the day of the test.

You must also bring with you to the testing location one form of government-issued identification that includes a photograph and your signature.

If you do not have an admission ticket, you must still bring a recent photograph and the required identification to the test center.”

This change in policy for Canada may be related to, University Victoria Profesor Klube, who complained to the Privacy Commission of Canada, about the LSAT fingerprinting requirement.

A copy of the Privacy Commission’s response to Professor Klube, may be read at:
http://www.cippic.ca/en/news/documents/LSAC-Thumbprinting.pdf

Richardson - LSAT - GMAT - GRE - MCAT Preparation Courses - Toronto, Canada

Report On The June 11, 2007 LSAT

June 11, 2007 – Something Old! Something New! Something Borrowed!

Something Old:

It was pretty much business as usual. No surprises. Nothing but the usual complaints (it is after all, the LSAT) The writing sample reverted to the traditional “decision model”. The “argument model” was discontinued effective February 07.

Something New:

The June 11 LSAT was the first test to feature the new Comparative Reading Question type. Most takers found it quite manageable and not overly different from the traditional question type. Those interested in Comparative Reading may find the following site useful:
http://lsatcomparativereading.wordpress.com

Something Borrowed:

There are many in the pre-law community that think that LSAT tests dating back to the early 1990s are somehow obsolete. The June 11 LSAT included at least one experimental section that included logical reasoning questions from 1992. It is interesting to note that these particular questions are no longer available for purchase from LSAT.

LSAT has released a total of 56 LSAT tests from the current LSAT era. (The current format of the LSAT started in June 1991 and continues to the present day.) Not all of those tests are available for purchase.

You should know that the June 11/07 LSAT will not be released for purchase, but is available as a free download from the LSAT site. Because this is the only actual test with Comparative Reading Questions, you need to work with this test!

Richardson - LSAT - GMAT - GRE - MCAT Preparation Courses - Toronto, Canada
http://www.prep.com

University Of Ottawa Annouces 3 Year Joint Civil/Common Law Degree Program

"The University of Ottawa has announced that it will be offering acombined Civil/Common law program which may be completed in threeyears. Ottawa and McGill will be the only Canadian schools to offerboth the LL.B. and a Civil law degree in three years - the time thatit normally take to earn one of these degrees. This new option will beavailable effective September 2008. The University of Ottawa lawschool also offers the following programs:- three year LL.B. in English- three year LL.B. in French- three year Civil law degree in French- LL.B./J.D. with either of Michigan State University or American University- Joint LL.B./Masters in Political Science with Carleton University- the opportunity for those with an LL.B. to earn a civil law degree in one year- the opportunity for those with a Civil law degree to earn an LL.B.in one year"

Richardson - LSAT - GMAT - GRE - MCAT Preparation Courses - Toronto, Canada
http://www.prep.com