Web exclusive content
Monday, 17 March 2014 08:00 Written by Stephen Mabey
This month’s column addresses the third “P” that today’s law firms need to tackle to ensure they are tomorrow’s law firms too. The January column addressed the need to have processes that ensure the efficient and effective delivery of legal services without which you could be out of step with clients’ needs. February’s dealt with the importance of having and sticking to a pricing strategy again without which you could be disengaging clients (unfortunately unknowingly).
Monday, 17 March 2014 08:00 Written by Damian J. Penny
|NewLaw New Rules — A conversation about the future of the legal services industry by George Beaton, Beaton Capital, 2013, pp. 210.|
Monday, 17 March 2014 08:00 Written by Jim Shanks
Monday, 17 March 2014 08:00 Written by Steve Szentesi
|There are too many competitive restraints in Toronto’s new proposals to regulate food trucks. (Photo: Jennifer Brown)|
I just enjoyed a thoroughly wonderful Sunday brunch with five friends, all of whom happen to be lawyers called to the bar sometime between 2011 and 2013. If I haven’t said it often enough in this column, I’ll say it again: having friends and colleagues with whom you can trade war stories is invaluable.
Even in the midst of the paperless office trend, which has been slowly spreading in the legal profession over the last decade and really took off a few years ago, and really until only a few years ago, I used to carry my lovely leather-bound Day-Timer with me whenever I left the office. It had all my to-do lists, calendar, daily notes, and my sacred yellow legal pad.
Monday, 24 February 2014 10:51 Written by Debra Forman
Monday, 24 February 2014 08:00 Written by Tony Wilson
Last year, my assistant of six years came into my office and said: “My husband and I are moving to Edmonton.” Even though they lived in a condo in suburban New Westminster (coincidentally, the “burb” where I live), and the commute is only 30 minutes on the Skytrain, she and her husband wanted a house with a yard.
In a stunning reversal, a five-judge panel of the Ontario Court of Appeal reversed its decision in Sharma v. Timminco Ltd. where it just recently held that the three-year limitation period for bringing a statutory claim for misrepresentation in respect of shares trading in the secondary market could not be suspended until a court had granted leave to commence the claim.