Legal Feeds Blog
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP has nabbed the former general counsel at CBC as strategic adviser and counsel in its securities and capital markets group.
|Former general counsel of CBC, Maryse Bertrand, has joined BLG.|
Maryse Bertrand was general counsel and vice president, real estate services, legal services and corporate secretary at CBC/Radio-Canada from 2009 to 2015 and an M&A partner at Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP for 20 years before that.
Bertrand says that she was in discussions with a number of law firms after having just completed a Master of Science in risk management at New York University’s Leonard N. Stern School of Business this spring.
“It is all about the clientele that you have and the nature of the work that you have and BLG was the best fit,” she says.
She is looking to apply her knowledge of M&A that she acquired while in private practice in her new role, while also drawing on her experience in risk management and governance from the CBC.
“As general counsel at the CBC, I was very much in charge of risk management. I handled a fair amount of matters.” One of the high-profile matters Bertrand dealt with at the CBC was the Jian Ghomeshi scandal, as well as “a couple of less high-profile ones that were just as important for the organization.
“I enjoyed my time at the CBC, I spent almost six years there, so I really really enjoyed that. It gave me a whole lot of respect for public service. A lot of dedicated people who work very very hard for, compared to the private sector, less money, and sometimes frankly less recognition, so there are a lot of things to be done, there are a lot of challenges, and I like that.”
Bertrand left the CBC last year to complete her master’s degree, and having advised on governance while sitting on a number of company boards in her time at the CBC, she says she “decided that I would pursue that on a full-time basis as opposed to doing that part-time.”
While at the CBC, Bertrand was responsible for three business units: real estate and health, safety and environment portfolios of CBC/Radio-Canada in Canada and abroad, the legal department with offices in Montréal, Toronto and Ottawa and the Corporate Secretariat. She chaired the CBC’s national crisis committee and managed compliance with access to information and privacy laws.
In fact, managing crisis seems to be a theme throughout her career. Bertrand says the financial crisis was partly what prompted her to leave her private M&A practice in 2009 at Davies to join the CBC, as she guessed the work would not be as interesting in the short term.
“In terms of M&A work, you can only imagine that it was pretty boring [post-crisis] as compared to the previous 10, 15 years that had been absolutely amazing. My assessment at the time, which I think was probably right on, was that it would take many many years for things to actually come back to any sort of interesting level.”
With her experience at the CBC managing crisis and her masters in risk management, she anticipates advising BLG clients on governance as well as traditional M&A.
Bertrand says risk management is a new growth area.
“From a governance point of view, being a corporate director is getting professionalized, if I can put it that way. Shareholders, institutional investors, are asking more of corporate directors, quite rightfully [so]. They are asking them to be more proficient, to focus more on a number of more strategic areas, compensation being one of them, but risk is also very much at the forefront since the [financial] crisis in particular.”
“It is a pleasure to welcome Maryse to the firm,” said Sean Weir, BLG’s national managing partner and CEO, in a press release. “She has successfully advised private and public companies on a broad range of corporate issues with outstanding commitment to client service. Her impressive track record is an inspiration for senior leadership and rising stars.”
SIU investigates after woman dies in police custody, Canadian Press
National security review begins with release of discussion paper, Canadian Press
The Canadian Bar Association’s B.C. branch is pushing for lawyers willing to work in rural areas to be able to access the province’s student loan forgiveness program.
|Michael Welsh, president of the CBA’s B.C. branch, says some communities are ‘reaching a point where there’s going to be a crisis in terms of being able to have access to legal services if something’s not done.’|
“Our proposal [to the provincial government] was that if a lawyer would commit for a period of say five years that a fifth would be written off over each year — it’s equivalent to programs that the government currently has for health professionals who agree to work in underserviced areas of the province,” Michael Welsh, president of CBABC, says.
The proposal states “our new lawyers are concerned about their financial future. A student loan forgiveness program for new rural BC lawyers would not only bring jobs to rural BC but would help support more vibrant rural infrastructure and economies.”
CBABC has been attempting to address the issue of high-need rural communities for the past few years, including through their program Rural Education and Access to Lawyers which is funded by the law society and the law foundation in the province.
REAL finds law students summer positions in communities that need lawyers and through that process CBABC identified “a number of communities . . . that are reaching a point where there’s going to be a crisis in terms of being able to have access to legal services if something’s not done over the next several years,” Welsh says.
It was through the REAL program that CBABC became more sophisticated in targeting where the real need is, Welsh says. The need arises because existing lawyers in rural areas are older and facing retirement or at least a reduction in the amount of work they’re doing, but younger lawyers aren’t coming in to replace them. Welsh says in large part that’s due to high student debt loads and the concern that there won’t be enough income — at least during the start-up period — to be able to keep up with payments. Larger centres offer jobs with larger firms and guaranteed incomes, Walsh says, and so more young lawyers are heading to urban settings.
“That was the genesis of our student loan forgiveness proposal — we saw that need, and identified that reason for it, so we’re taking it in tandem with what we’re already doing to see if we can work with government to address that,” Welsh says.
While “there’s nothing like what we’re proposing . . . in any other province or territory,” Welsh says the CBABC’s proposal notes that in 2015:
• Newfoundland and Labrador became the first province to completely eliminate its student loan program by replacing provincial student loans were with grants. While NL does not have a law school, its loan program also applies to programs outside of NL.
• In New Brunswick, undergraduates can apply for provincial debt reduction after holding total loans greater than $32,000.00. In Nova Scotia, students can defer payments on their provincial student loans for up to 12 months during articles.
• Some Canadian law schools are experimenting with income contingent loan programs. At York University’s Osgoode Hall, five law students are benefitting from a program that provides funds to cover tuition costs, requiring repayment depending on the student’s financial status before and after law school.
• Osgoode Hall’s law school has implemented a pilot project that is an income contingent loan program aimed at granting eligible students with relief against tuition payments which are to be repaid according to their post-law school income levels.
• The University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law has an income contingent “Back-End Debt Relief Program” designed to assist graduates with repayment of student loans incurred while studying at the law school.
Welsh also notes other countries are facing similar access to justice issues in rural areas. He says in the United States, North Dakota pays lawyers $12,000 annually to practise in its high-need communities.
CBABC has yet to hear back from the government, but Welsh says he’s hopeful discussions will start over the next few months.
Two bodies found on board fishing boat near St. John's: RCMP, Canadian Press
A request for proposal has gone out from the Law Foundation of B.C. to non-profit organizations to submit a plan for developing and implementing a children’s lawyer’s office in B.C.
Interested organizations were given a Sept. 15 deadline to submit a proposal for the two-year pilot project, which has available funding up to $600,000.
Foundation executive director Wayne Robertson says the new office could be in place by spring 2017.
A $158,000 cy prés award (the result of a class action) landing in the foundation’s child welfare fund had triggered its board to examine different initiatives, says Robertson. The child welfare fund was created to improve and protect the welfare of children.
“The board of the law foundation looked at what we might do and the idea of funding a children’s lawyer’s office was one of the possibilities. Ultimately, it was decided and we looked at what we would do about finding enough funds to launch a pilot project,” says Robertson.
The foundation raised $600,000. The child welfare fund had some existing money, which was combined with the cy prés award, while other contributors were the foundation’s Strategic Initiative Fund, the Law Society of B.C. Access to Justice Fund, the Notary Foundation of B.C. and B.C.’s Office of the Representative for Children and Youth.
The decision to re-establish an office, which was closed 12 years ago when the province cut legal funding, was rooted in a growing concern that children’s voices were not being heard in legal matters.
“It was seen that our children are a vulnerable group. They don’t have representatives in proceedings that affect them or in family law proceedings,” he says.
Robertson says he believes there will be three main focal areas where the office could become involved if needed. The first is in contested disputes between parents in family law cases where the interests of the child or children are impacted. The second area, he says, is in child protection cases where the child or children should have an independent representation to voice their concerns.
“There is some provision under our [existing] legislation, but it doesn’t seem to be well known and seems limited,” he says. The third area is issues that impact a child’s social life such as legal issues arising from school, employment, housing, bullying or street gangs.
While the office of the children’s lawyer will be available to all children, a priority will be to address the legal issues that impact aboriginal children and youth as well as immigrant and refugee, street-involved and LGBTQ youth.
Robertson says the proposals from organizations will be considered and a decision made on the successful applicant by late November.
“The proposals will give us an idea of what the landscape might look like,” says Robertson, who admits that $300,000 a year is not a lot of funding. The organization will have to outline how it plans to deliver legal services to youth throughout the province. He says there will probably be only one office and that the organization will hire lawyers on a “case-by-case” basis as is needed to represent B.C. youth.
When the office is in place, B.C. will be the fourth province to offer these services to children and youth. “Ontario, New Brunswick and Alberta have lawyer services for children,” Robertson says, but each system is different with some offering more coverage than others.
If the successful applicant is advised in November, Robertson says he believes the organization could be in place by April 2017. “It really depends upon how quickly they can get things together such as hiring staff, developing procedures and finding space to rent,” he says.
An important part of the pilot program will be its evaluation, says Robertson.
“We will be ensuring that there is good evaluation of the program so that at the end of the pilot phase we can determine what difference the work of the office has made to children and, if successful, we hope that money might be made to continue the work,” he says.
Ninth person arrested in alleged cocaine ring in Niagara region, Canadian Press
Hearing begins to determine fate of Calgary Justice Robin Camp, Canadian Press
Kellogg Canada is the latest company to be hit under Canada’s Anti-Spam Law, ordered by the CRTC to pay $60,000 as part of a settlement for alleged violations that took place over a relatively short period of time.
|Lawyer Steve Szentesi says the Kellogg Canada CASL case is ‘something of a caution that companies should ensure that third party marketers and partners comply with CASL.’|
A statement issued by the CRTC on Sept. 1 indicated Kellogg Canada Inc. “…voluntarily entered into an undertaking with the chief compliance and enforcement officer of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, in relation to an alleged violation of paragraph 6(1)(a) of the Act:
“From 1 October 2014 to 16 December 2014, inclusively, messages were sent by Kellogg and/or its third party service providers during the period of 1 October 2014 to 16 December 2014 to recipients without consent of their recipients.”
Pursuant to section 21 of the Act, Kellogg Canada Inc. agreed to the monetary payment of $60,000 and to comply with, and ensure that any third party authorized to send a commercial electronic message on its behalf complies with, the Act and regulations, and to review and update its compliance program.
The compliance program will be reviewed and updated by Kellogg Canada Inc. with the goal to promote compliance with the Act and regulations. More specifically, the program will cover elements such as revising written policies and procedures regarding compliance, training programs for Kellogg employees, tracking of commercial electronic message complaints and subsequent resolution, and implementing updated monitoring and auditing mechanisms to assess compliance.
No one from Kellogg Canada was available for comment, but the company issued a statement on Friday:
“We are aware and disappointed in our company’s alleged violation of Canada’s anti-spam legislation as it relates to commercial electronic messages sent by our third party suppliers on behalf of Kellogg Canada in late 2014. We are cooperating fully with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), and voluntarily undertaking a number of immediate actions to ensure our compliance and that of our third-party suppliers. At Kellogg, consumers are at the heart of all we do, and we will continue to earn their trust and demonstrate a commitment to integrity and ethics each and every day.”
In the statement, the CRTC noted: “This Undertaking fully and completely resolves all outstanding issues with respect to Kellogg’s or its subsidiaries’ alleged non-compliance with the Act, including the payment of any specified amount in relation thereto, between the Commission and Kellogg Canada Inc. in relation to the CCEO’s investigation into the alleged violation by Kellogg Canada Inc. during the period of 1 October 2014 up to and including the Effective Date of this Undertaking.”
Bradley Freedman, partner with Borden Ladner Gervais LLP in Vancouver, says the settlement is notable in that it is the first time an alleged violation has been by an organization or its service providers.
“You can see how the language is not clear — it says Kellogg Canada and/or its third-party service providers,” says Freedman.
He adds that there are things organizations can do such as educating employees and following appropriate policies and procedures.
Marketing and advertising lawyer Steve Szentesi says the case shows that the CRTC is still working through matters that arose early following the coming into force of CASL and that compliance with the basic CASL requirements (consent, identification and an easy unsubscribe mechanism) remain key for companies marketing electronically.
“This case is also something of a caution that companies should ensure that third-party marketers and partners comply with CASL,” says Szentesi.
“Companies using third-party marketers for electronic marketing may also consider risk-shifting provisions in their agreements with marketers in the event CASL issues arise,” he says.
The case also sends a message that the CRTC wants companies engaging in electronic marketing to have effective compliance programs.
Violation of CASL’s CEM rules can result in penalties up to $1 million per violation for individuals and up to $10 million per violation for organizations, civil liability through a private right of action (commencing July 1, 2017) and vicarious liability on employers, directors and officers. CASL gives the CRTC regulatory and enforcement authority regarding CEMs and other matters.
The Ontario court of Appeal has set aside a possession of guns and drugs conviction after finding the Crown used inappropriate tactics to question a defence witness.
|James Lockyer says in his experience, 'there’s a significant problem with Crown attorneys going outside the rules of prosecution.'|
During a break from cross-examining a key defence witness, the Crown attorney made a long distance call in the courtroom to verify the witness's claim with her family member in India, a man named Parminder. The call was placed on speakerphone, and the family member could be heard contradicting the witness's evidence.
"Crown counsel spoke in a loud voice, as though he wanted everyone in the courtroom to hear the conversation. Both sides of the conversation were, in fact, clearly audible to everyone present," said appeal court Justice George Strathy.
"In my view, the Crown's telephone call to Parminder, in the courtroom with spectators present, was improper. So was the manner in which the Crown used the information obtained on the phone call," said Strathy, who wrote on behalf of a unanimous panel. "The reasonable inference is that he made the call, in public, in the courtroom, on a speaker phone, in a loud voice, so that word of Parminder's denials would get back to the witness...through one of the spectators."
Strathy said the phone call was "a deliberate ploy" to influence the witness's evidence in the middle of cross-examinations through communication that wasn't part of the record. "It was entirely improper," said the judge, who set aside the conviction and ordered a new trial.
The cross-examination, and the hearsay evidence the Crown introduced, might have affected the jury's perception and verdict, according to Strathy. "Examined in the context of the whole trial, and taken together with the improper cross-examination of the appellant, the Crown's conduct was sufficiently prejudicial that it deprived the appellant of a fair trial," he said.
Added Strathy: "It may well be that through inexperience or overzealousness or both the Crown 'momentarily lost sight of his obligations,' in the words of Cory J. in Logiancco."
The appeal court also took issue with the way Crown counsel cross examined the accused, Bickramjit Dhaliwal, finding that he was improperly asked to explain the charges against him. Dhaliwal was accused of planting weapons and drugs in his nephew's house and car, and calling police anonymously to report the weapons. Dhaliwal denied the charges. His sister, the defence witness on the stand, testified that a third family member, Parminder, had phoned to warn her the nephew had weapons and was coming after her and her brother Dhaliwal.
Last week, the appeal court head another case where the Crown's line of questioning was deemed improper both by the trial judge and the appeal court, but a retrial wasn't ordered in that case. In R. v. John, the Crown suggested during cross-examination that the accused could have called a witness to verify his claim, an assertion the court said shifted the onus of proof on the accused.
Criminal lawyer James Lockyer represented the appellants in both John and Dhaliwal. He says in his experience, “there’s a significant problem with Crown attorneys going outside the rules of prosecution.”
In John, the trial judge asked the jury to disregard that line of questioning, a measure deemed sufficient by the court of appeal to erase the effect of the Crown’s improper questioning.
“More often than not, the court of appeal and the trial courts say that they can correct what the Crown has done wrong by instructing the jury, and I must say I find that unsatisfactory in most cases,” Lockyer says.
Criminal lawyer Daniel Brown agrees with Lockyer. “When you read the conduct in the John case, you say, ‘This is even worse than what happened in the Dhaliwal case,’” he says.
“So it’s kind of puzzling to understand how in one case the court of appeal says this improper cross-examination might have affected the jury verdict and in another case [says] the jury is capable of following the judge’s instruction and the judge’s instruction was enough to resolve the issue.”
"No instruction to the jury could cure the types of problems raised in these cases."
Update: James Lockyer comments added at 2:20 p.m.
Halifax police seek public's help in man's shooting death, Canadian Press
Privatized health-care proponent in B.C. Supreme Court next week, Canadian Press
Subscribe to Legal Feeds
- Mallory Hendry
- Patricia Cancilla
- Jennifer Brown
- Alex Robinson
- Elizabeth Raymer
- Gabrielle Giroday
- Tim Wilbur
- Karen Lorimer