The
Canadian Bar Association British Columbia
CBA Fee Challenge Dismissed Supreme Court upholds Law Society/CBA position
Inside President's Column
3
Section Talk
5
Practice Talk
7
Legislative Update
9
The New Deputy Attorney General 19 Make Your Resolutions Reality
20
Law Week
21
Executive Director's Column 22 Sole Practitioner Ted Boe
23
Nothing Official
24
CBABC Web site
25
Bar Moves
27
CLE
29
B.C. Courthouse Library Society 29 Law Foundation of B.C.
30
Classified Ads
32
BarT a/i<Publication Sales Agreement #40741008
n December 17, 2003, a Supreme Court of B.C. ruling confirmed that the Law Society of B.C. is authorized under the Legal Professions Act to set and collect a practice fee which includes a fee to be paid to the Canadian Bar Association.
benchers in remitting such a fee to the CBA on behalf of all practising lawyers, was not "patently unreasonable or even unreasonable."
"In my view, provided that overarching restriction is respected, the specific merits of any particular program the members see fit to support, whether it be the Canadian Bar Association, the Lawyers Assistance Program or "... the specific merits of any the British Columbia Courtparticular program the memhouse Library Society is not bers see fit to support ...is not a matter that should be rea matter that should be reviewed by the court."
A ruling had been sought by Mr. Richard Gibbs, QC, that section 23(1)(a) of the Legal Professions Act does not permit members of the Society to include a CBA fee viewed by the court." amount in the practice fee, Quoting MacDonald, J. in and that section 24(1)(c) Beltz v. Law Society of British does not permit the Benchers to collect and remit to the CBA such a fee on Columbia, Justice Taylor wrote: "On policy matters, honest and sincere people often hold differbehalf of all practising lawyers. ent views, but the court is not the arbiter of the The Law SocietY, of B.C. and the CBA argued correctness of one view over another." that section 23(1) allowed the members of the "I agree with that statement and would add that Society to set the practice fee, including a universal CBA fee, and that the general power given to the courts should not intervene when there is the Benchers by section 4 of the Act was not re- found to be reasonableness of a position taken stricted by the specific authority to collect CBA by a majority of the members of the society that the work of the association is consistent with fees in s. 24. the objects and duties of the society." The petitioner argued that the setting of the fee for members of the Law Society "violated an Richard Gibbs, QC appeared in person, the Law overarching restriction imposed by the Legal Society was represented by Murray Clemens, Professions Act being that the setting of practice QC, and the CBA was represented by Geoff fees must include only purposes consistent with Cowper QC and Stanley Martin. the objects and duties of the Society as enumerA full text of the decision can be found at ated ins. 3 of the Act." www .courts.gov .bc.caljdb-txtl scl03 I 18 I â&#x20AC;˘ Mr. Justice Taylor held that the objects of the 2003bcsc1814.htm CBA were substantially consistent with those of the Society, and therefore the actions of the members in setting the practice fee, and the
www.bccba.org