Ultra Vires Vol 15 Issue 4 2014 Jan

the independent student newspaper of the university of toronto faculty of law

EDITORIAL/NEWS

2 | JANUARY 29, 2014

ultravires.ca

This Was Not Supposed to Be a Valentine’s Issue EMILY DEBONO (3L)

W

hen I found out that I was going to be Editor In Chief this year, I immediately knew what I wanted my legacy to be. “This year we’re eliminating the Valentine’s issue.” I’ve said it multiple times throughout the year: at our first board meeting, at every editorial meeting since, and literally every single time I spoke at our meeting for this issue. It goes without saying that I’m writing this surrounded by cats.

But the point isn’t whether I’m going to spend Valentine’s Day with my kind and gorgeous medical doctor significant other or whether we (my cats and I) are going to spend it marathoning House of Cards. Valentine’s Day is a great opportunity to indulge in your happiness/sadness/emotional stuntedness, but aren’t there more interesting things to write about?

Apparently not. As you can see on almost every page of this issue, I was overruled by the Board and the writers and society at large. I’m over it, but would like to offer my thoughts on an entirely unrelated and decidedly less glamorous topic: the proposed changes to the 1L curriculum. Did I awkwardly segue into a discussion about 1L policy to avoid dealing with my Valentine’s Day despair? Yes, yes I did.

In my opinion, a move to semesterize the year-long curriculum would hurt students much more than it would help them. Having December fail-safe exams is an incredibly important part of the 1L learning process. Students have only been in law school for slightly more than three months when the December exams roll around. December exams give students an opportunity to get feedback before their marks really matter. They give students a chance to refine their study habits, and perhaps equally importantly, give students a measure of confidence that they actually do understand something.

Of course, having five 100% exams in April is stressful but there are other approaches the administration could consider to help minimize the negative impact on students’ well-

Welcome to My World Consultation and Canada Post PROFESSOR DOUGLAS SANDERSON

L

ike most Canadians, I was startled to hear in December that Canada Post was planning to eliminate door-to-door delivery of mail, and raise the price of domestic stamps to $1.00. But then came the real shock, this massive increase in the price of stamps and the elimination of door-to-door delivery were supported by Canadians. The implication was clear: we had asked for this change and Canada Post was simply responding to what Canadians had told them.

I struggled to recall being asked about these, or any changes, to Canada Post. But Canada Post spokespeople hit the airwaves, frequently referring to their massive consultation with Canadians. Massive consultation? Did someone call you? Did you throw out a mailer from Canada Post asking for your opinion? No you didn’t.

No one called you. Nothing was mailed to you.

Canada Post’s consultation consisted of town meetings in forty-six communities, and these were advertised via an April 24th news release, a “Future of Canada Post” banner on canadapost. ca, digital signage on post offices, and a message printed on receipts issued at Canada Post outlets.

Canada Post’s report on its consultations doesn’t say how many people attended the forty-six community meetings, nor does it provide anything more than snippets of dialogue from participants who attended, and who, of course, support the cuts. Further consultation was achieved through the receipt of 3006 online comments, and, quaintly enough, 868 letters. The quotes provided in Canada Post’s report on consultations include some well-selected snippets.

One online comment went so far as to note that the cost of stamps had “gone up so slowly over the years. It’s long overdue to catch up.” Another

said, “Moving something across the country in a few days should cost more.” With comments like these, who needs enemies?

Clearly, Canadians wanted to pay almost twice as much for half the service. We had been consulted.

And that’s the real kick in the teeth. Rather than make the hard decisions and say to politicians and the populous, “That’s the option we’re putting on the table, what do you think?” Canada Post is choosing to blame its hard choices on a public that is begging to pay more for less.

Well, all I can say is, welcome to my world.

First Nations routinely state that they are not consulted when important decisions are made that affect their communities. The Harper government recently introduced a bill that would make fundamental changes to the structure and oversight of schools in reserve communities and

being. One approach could be to weigh failsafe exams more heavily. I encourage you all to share your opinions and suggestions with the administration so we can find a creative solution to what is undoubtedly a difficult problem.

If you’re reading this with a delicious doughnut in hand on Wednesday January 29th put down this paper and head to the Town Hall today at 12:30 PM in EM001. If you missed it, you should still share your views. Especially if you don’t have anything to do on Valentine’s Day.

what do we hear from First Nations—we hear that they were not consulted.

The Idle No More movement has struggled to bring First Nation issues to the forefront of Canadian public and civic consciousness. All too often non-First Nations people feel that Aboriginal people are complainers, that their issues are dealt with rationally and appropriately by federal officials.

Think again. If you were caught off guard by Canada Post’s announcement last month, you shouldn’t have been. You were consulted, and now a federal Crown agency has only you to blame for the conditions of your postal service.

You made this happen. It’s your fault.

So, remember this the next time you hear First Nations people complain that they weren’t consulted. And remember to read the receipt the next time you interact with a federal government agency—or you might end having your home flooded by a dam, or a pipeline rammed through your community. And if that happens, it’s your fault. You were consulted.

Douglas Sanderson is an Assistant Professor in the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law and a member of the Opaskwayak Cree Nation.

Ultra Vires is an editorially independent publication. We are open to contributions which reflect diverse points of view, and our contents do not necessarily reflect the views of the Faculty of Law, the Students’ Law Society, or the editorial board.

Editor-in-Chief Editor-in-Chief, Emeritus News Editors Features Editors Opinion Editors Diversions Editor Special Content Editors 1L Editors VP Finance Web Editors Layout Editor

Emily Debono Patrick Hartford David Gruber & Katherine Georgious Marita Zouravlioff & Jacquie Richards Louis Tsilivis & Paloma van Groll Alanna Tevel David Feldman & Eryn Fanjoy Alexander Carmona & Lisana Nithiananthan Daanish Samadmoten Kevin Siu & Aron Nimani Alyssa Howes

Errors If you find any errors in Ultra Vires, please email ultra.vires@utoronto.ca

Advertising Advertising inquiries should be sent to vp Finance Daanish Samadmoten at ultra.vires@utoronto.ca.

Submissions If you have an article submission or a tip for us, please contact us at ultra.vires@utoronto.ca.

Ultra Vires reserves the right to edit submissions for brevity and clarity.

NEWS

ultravires.ca

JANUARY 29, 2014 | 3

An Interview with Meric Gertler The First Dean of Arts and Science To Become President of the University of Toronto KENT KURAN (1L)

T

he University of Toronto has a new captain to helm the ship, to borrow from outgoing president David Naylor’s penchant for nautical narratives. Incoming president Meric Gertler recently began his first of possibly two five-year terms as the university’s 16th president.

Meric Gertler, a professor of geography, is the first Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Science to become president in the university’s modern era. Previously, professional faculty deans would generally ascend to Simcoe Hall, holding both the presidency and provostship in a delicate power balance akin to cardinals politicking for the papacy.

As president, Gertler wants to further the university’s core mission to excel in research and teaching. “I suggested we do that by promoting three priorities. The first is leveraging our location in this region more effectively. The second is to strengthen and deepen international partnerships. Finally, the third is the great work that has been done in advancing undergraduate education and reinventing that project.”

In the contemporary world of metrics, the modern day equivalent of reputation, he has also spent much time stressing the multitudinous rankings in which U of T has seen its stature rise globally. It is now in league with top American, British, and Australian institutions.

However, he also knows that U of T has much work to do when it comes to rankings of its student experience. U of T along with other large universities in major cities like UBC, McGill and York, have consistently ranked at the bottom of the National Survey of Student Experience (NSSE). Hence why he wants to work his way from the bottom up, starting with arts and science.

Undergraduate Education Long known as a research powerhouse, Gertler wants people to see U of T as an undergraduate school as well.

“That is one of the reasons why reinventing undergraduate education was such a priority for me [as Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Science].

It is something that comes very naturally to me because I have spent quite some time—five years—very seized with this question.”

While U of T takes the top graduate and professional students according to Ontarian higher education statistics, it currently trails closely

behind Queen’s University when it comes to undergraduate admissions. Gertler wants to change that. With U of T’s new college “One” programs as well as more emphasis on small groups, Gertler remarked that he has tried to address the challenge of having one of the highest student-to-instructor ratios. Already, he says, it is paying dividends. Long known for being quite competitive and expansive, Gertler says students are connecting with each other within the large community that is U of T undergrad.

He hopes that those experiences will slowly be passed along by word of mouth, which he has already heard about from students and parents, and make their way to publications such as Maclean’s University Ranking and The Globe and Mail’s University Report. Though, U of T’s size will still remain a major issue to be resolved.

Plans for the Future As for U of T’s future, plans set years prior may be seeing some revision. Back in 2007, a policy

discussion that culminated in a proposal titled Towards 2030 called for major changes to the university’s business model. Approved by the Governing Council in 2008, Towards 2030 called for reducing the undergraduate population on the Saint George campus while growing graduate enrollment and further focusing on professional faculties. Meanwhile, the university would slowly let its satellite campuses— Mississauga and Scarborough—grow more independent into what Naylor in late 2013 called “mid-sized comprehensive universities with a real regional impact”.

“The general philosophy of 2030 is definitely in play. What the presidential search committee found when they were preparing to do the consulting process across the entire university was that there is a high level of alignment around the broad goals that 2030 laid out. I believe the previous provostial exercise that generated the Year from 2012 review reaffirmed the institution-wide 2030 principles that were accentuating our strengths in research and graduate edu-

cation, leveraging that identity to provide an undergraduate identity that is distinctive from other universities, among other things.”

Gertler frankly explained that, “The less favorable news from the 2030 futures is that it was difficult for us to shrink our undergraduate enrollments in the face of a grant per student that was not growing. The basic income units [a method the government uses to calculate funding] have been fixed for a long time. So, its purchasing value has been declining over time.

So, it is difficult to shrink undergraduate enrollments as was envisioned in that document under those economically unfavorable conditions.

That has been one of the constraints.”

Hence for now there is a shift towards using international students to balance the budgets, as the university slowly moves forward with its ultimate plans.

“There is more leeway for how universities set tuition fees for international students. One thing that we discovered was that our international enrollments at the institutional level were smaller relative to the size of the university when compared to peer institutions across Canada and the world. So there was scope to grow international enrollments. It is a way of widening a pool that we draw from and getting great students but also enriching the experience for all students here.”

Gertler is hopeful that within one year, other circumstances would change that would mitigate many of the currently proposed regulations, referring to the potential upcoming provincial election.

“That [university] regulation seems to be growing ever tighter with each passing year, especially as the government provides less of our budget,” conveyed Gertler. His corporate style of referring to business cases and new markets is in contrast to Naylor’s bureaucratic leadership, and it envisions U of T as an increasingly more independent institution.

Only time will tell where the winds will blow and which direction the University of Toronto takes to adapt to the current regulatory and competitive commercial environment, where higher education seems to be headed.

Disclosure: Kent Kuran is a former Governor of the University of Toronto.

A longer version of this article including the full interview is available as a feature at ultravires.ca.

Your Thoughts for an iPad? EVAN RANKIN (1L)

I

t’s late. 1 a.m. on a Saturday, actually. I’m tired and stressed and alone. I’m thinking about money. I should be thinking about Torts, but yeah, I’m thinking about money.

I’m also looking at my Facebook chat list and I’m realizing that a lot of my friends are online too. They’re also tired. And yes, I’d bet that they’re thinking about money. And maybe feeling alone.

This is true, I think, of law students across Ontario, but I don’t know for sure. Nobody has tried to tell the story of how money has affected law students and the legal profession in Ontario.

I don’t think money has affected the profession in Ontario positively. I suspect our career choices have changed as a result of our debt, leaving many Canadians unable to find or afford legal representation. But again, I am not sure.

We need to talk about tuition and how it’s changing our profession. In order to do that, we need to have a better grasp of the facts of our situation.

This week, five law schools—including our own—have agreed to launch an anonymous online survey in order to gather information on how tuition has impacted us. It is more comprehensive

than some of the data that U of T collects. The information will give us the most complete picture of the impact of tuition, fees, and debt currently available. It should take 20 minutes and is available online (http://www.yorku.ca/surveys/survey.php?sid=1396). We want to have a complete and accurate view of the situation, so we are encouraging all students to fill it in.

It’s time to start thinking differently about tuition. Let’s see what the facts say.

PS. There’s also an opportunity to win a free iPad involved if you do the survey. #Bribery.

4 | JANUARY 29, 2014

NEWS

ultravires.ca

Professor Anthony Niblett Wins Jeopardy KENT KURAN (1L)

E

ver wondered if your mad trivia skills will take you places? Well, U of T Law professor and trivia wizard Anthony Niblett went all the way to the top. Appearing on Jeopardy, Niblett managed to win his first game on Christmas Day, and came in second the following day.

The British-born, Australian-raised, American-educated, and Canadian-resident academic is a regular trivia player. Niblett, who teaches first year contracts and regularly hosts trivia games during pub nights, has been playing on trivia teams for about ten years now. With winnings of $19,601 dollars and $2,000 dollars in his first and second games, respectively, he plans on heading to Iceland in May after the end of the 2014 winter term.

As for getting on the show in the first place, not unlike law school, there's a test.

“I always liked trivia and when the news of the online test first came out, all of my friends were taking it,” said Niblett. “Some of my friends are much better at trivia than me and I am sure they got better scores on the test. I think there must be some sort of randomization in who gets selected to audition.”

“Apparently 200 000 people sign up for the

online test. It is 50 questions, for which you get 10 seconds each to answer,” explained Niblett in an interview. “They do not tell you if you pass. Nor do they tell you how many people pass in general.”

A few months after that, Niblett got an email inviting him to audition down in Detroit. Another 50 questions, a practice game, and then an interview later, he went back home to wait once again.

It was only 3 months later, explained Niblett that, “I got a phone call saying come down to LA,” telling him they wanted to tape an episode.

“I just applied once. It was very bizarre and all happened so quickly from the first test to the audition to the getting on and then the one day of taping,” said Niblett, “It was one of the strangest days of my life.”

As for Alex Trebek, long time Jeopardy host, who is Canadian, “he was wondering why I did not speak Canadian, and why I spoke so funny,” said Niblett. “During both the audition and just before the taping they said, 'stop faking the accent.'”

“It is a big item off the bucket list,” said Niblett.

“The day of the taping was one of the strangest days of my life, but it was great! A lot of fun. I really enjoyed the whole experience.”

Trinity Western University’s proposed law school gets approval from the Federation of Law Societies and BC Government Canada’s first faith-based law school is set to open its doors in 2016 KATHERINE GEORGIOUS (3L)

A

midst a flurry of controversy, the Federation of Law Societies of Canada (FLSC) granted preliminary approval for a proposed common law program at Trinity Western University (TWU) on December 16, 2013. TWU is a Christian-based private university that mandates all students sign a “Community Covenant” in which they voluntarily abstain from a variety of acts including “sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman”. Critics of TWU argue that this Covenant discriminates against LGBT students, and a TWU law school would deny LGBT students equal access to law school.

The FLSC explained its decision to approve the school by noting that its mandate was limited to determining if a proposed law school “would produce graduates competent for admission to law society bar admission programs”. In a letter to Canada’s Law Societies, the President of the FLSC also stated that the debate about the form or conduct of a university code of conduct such as the TWU Community Covenant was one the FLSC felt was more appropriately had by

government legislators who oversee educational institutions as a whole.

Despite its narrow mandate, the FLSC did opt to initiate a Special Advisory Committee to determine if there was any public interest reason related to the Community Covenant that would serve as a reason to deny TWU’s application.

In its final report, the Special Advisory Committee came to the conclusion that there were no public interest reasons to bar TWU’s application. In coming to its conclusion, the Committee relied heavily on the Supreme Court’s decision in BC College of Teachers v.

Trinity Western University, where the Court held that the BC College of Teachers erred in its decision to deny TWU a teacher’s college on the basis of discrimination. The Committee found that there was no evidence of any harm that would lead them to a conclusion different from that of the Supreme Court’s. The Committee did state that if evidence of harm did emerge following TWU’s approval, it would be addressed at that time.

The Committee also found that it was reasonable to conclude that the Community Cov-

enant would make TWU an “unwelcoming” place for LGBT individuals and would “likely discourage” them from applying to TWU’s law school. However, this did not result in any fewer choices for LGBT students than they have currently. The Committee’s reasoning was that there was no evidence that TWU banned the admission of LGBT individuals, and that TWU would be an attractive option for some law students, whatever their sexual orientation.

The Committee did recommend that the FLSC consider adding a non-discrimination provision to its national requirement, similar to that required of American law schools. ABA approved schools are not permitted to discriminate based on sexual orientation, but private religious schools are free to create codes that prohibit certain conduct. The Committee did note that a Canadian clause based that mirrors ABA guidelines would still not bar approval of TWU’s law school, because TWU prohibits conduct, not status.

After gaining FLSC approval, TWU cleared its final hurdle to approval two days later, when the BC Ministry of Advanced Edu-

cation approved TWU’s application. Minister Amrik Virk stated that the program met quality assessment criteria and national standards for practicing law.

In response, efforts are underway to start a legal challenge to the BC and FLSC’s decisions. As of the time of publication, $4861 has been raised in a crowdsourcing campaign started by JD student Marcus McCann and the law firm Ruby Shiller Chan Hasan to fund this challenge. TWU anticipates that it will open its doors to its first class of 60 students in the Fall of 2016.

NEWS

ultravires.ca

JANUARY 29, 2014 | 5

Law Follies: Barely Legal 2 Curves, 1 Class JULES MONTEYNE (3L)

O

nce a year, the U of T Law community comes together to address the fundamental flaws that make up our collective self. “Why?” you may ask.

Because it tends to be really funny. We spend a year of our life working like dogs to get the opportunity to spend 17 minutes in a dimly lit cubicle trying to impress random strangers. This stuff writes itself.

This is the most bittersweet night of the year. You will have the opportunity to see the enormous amount of talent that exists in our community. Writing. Directing. Dancing. Singing.

Filmmaking. It all comes together on one stage in a two-hour extravaganza that you will never forget. The only downside?

You know that most of these amazing talents will be handcuffed to desks on Bay Street within the next couple of years, billing 8,765 hours and feeding intravenously.

That is what happens at big law, right?

Most of all, this show is funny. You will laugh. And not just alcohol-induced, everything-is-funny sort of laughs, but actually funny things will happen and be said.

Though you also might not be sober. There is a bar. It will have beer. It will have wine. It will also have a special Follies cocktail. All will be served in special sippy cups (contractually obligated), so you can revisit your days of being a toddler.

So come to Randolph Theatre on February 13. Tickets will be on sale at lunch at Birge outside the reading room starting January 29. They are $10 in advance and $15 at the door. Yes, this is cheaper than last year. Doors (and bar) will open at 7:30 and the show will start at 8:30.

Tell Us Your Experience of Diversity MICHAEL DA SILVA (SJD), SARA GHEBREMUSSE (LLM) & ESTHER LEXCHIN (3L)

O

n February 3rd, the Dean’s Committee on Gender, Accessibility and Diversity will release its first Equity and Diversity Survey. It will be available online to all students until February 18.

The aim of the survey is to ascertain the extent to which the University of Toronto Faculty of Law is meeting its commitment to creating and fostering an environment that is welcoming to all, with particular sensitivity to students from minority or equity-seeking groups.

On behalf of the Gender, Accessibility and Diversity Committee, we would like to encourage all students to complete the survey.

We know that you are all busy people and you might be thinking it’s not worth your time to fill it out, that the responses from the survey will simply sit on the proverbial shelf, but nothing could be further from the truth.

The Committee is composed of faculty, staff, JD and graduate students, and has spent almost a year designing the survey. The information gathered will go directly to helping the Committee make recommendations on what programs or initiatives should be introduced in order to make the law school a more welcoming place for all students. But we can’t do that without knowing what the issues are.

Of course we know there are anecdotal stories, but they’ve never been gathered and documented in a systematic way—that’s what the Committee hopes to do with this survey. We want to hear from all law students, since a greater number of responses will give us a more accurate picture of student experiences. So please, take a few minutes between February 3rd and 18th to fill out the survey, and tell us your experience of diversity at the law school.

MARITA ZOURAVLIOFF (2L)

I

mplementing the new grading scheme has been much like moving into a transitional space: awkward and unnerving for the skittish law student. Much of the initial furor has died down but we are still in flux. This year is unique in the fact that for the majority of the upper year classes, there are two grading schemes at play. While 2Ls and 3Ls have always been graded together in the past, this year profs were asked to meet different guidelines for each group. The 2Ls get to hope for those HH’s and the 3Ls are stuck in the dark ages with their A, Bs and Cs (and Ds? Did people actually get those?).

Originally the administration floated the idea of switching everyone to the new grading scheme this year, which would make marking less complicated. But, according to the Academic Handbook, the profs agree that segregating their classes “is better than having students with mixed transcripts, and they are willing to accept the cost”. Aww. The question is how profs are managing this novel and exciting challenge. One prof explained that his approach was to grade all the exams together and then to map the raw scores on the appropriate grades under the old and new system. Another prof I spoke to said that he thought he was supposed to grade the two years like they were completely different classes, and accordingly apply the old distribution system to the 3Ls and the new distribution system to the 2Ls. Clearly there is a little bit of room for interpretation.

It probably does not make a real difference, though. Eager to justify my P in Securities Reg, I asked some profs if the 3Ls generally outperform the 2Ls. It would seem logical that someone who has the benefit of an extra year of legal study under their belt would be better at law school. Nonetheless, the general sentiment seems to be that there is no discernible difference in performance. One prof remarked that he doubted he could tell a 2L from a 3L exam.

I don’t know if this is because you actually peak once you are done first year or if it is because the third years really do give zero damns, as they claim. Either way, any difference in profs’ marking approaches will likely not have an impact on your mark.

Technically the 2L grades are supposed to be more predictable. Part of the reason that the new scheme was implemented was the hope that it would provide for “more conformity in grades across courses”. The admin sought to eliminate the grade ‘lumping’ that resulted from the mandatory mean – profs would give

Continued on page 7

Why you should consider participating in the BLG Client Consultation Competition DHARSHA JEGATHEESWARAN (2L) & AYEESHA LALJI (2L)

S

urprising to many, lawyers actually have to be personable. Succeeding as a lawyer is just as much about being able to build a rapport with clients as it is about knowing substantive law. In fact, some would probably argue that the former skill is much more important. Yet the law school provides few opportunities for students in first year and even into upper years to develop their client counselling skills. There is no mandated requirement for students to develop these critical soft skills that will help them succeed once in the field.

It’s therefore not surprising that students often fail to appreciate the importance of developing the skills required to effectively interact with clients, a task which actually describes a large portion of the work of practicing lawyers.

The BLG Client Consultation Competition

is an initiative that attempts to respond to this obvious gap in legal learning. Participants engage in mock consultations with prospective clients where they are judged just as much on their ability to interact with the client as they are on substantive law (one of the judges is actually from the field of social work). In other words, a student’s ability to “read the room” and to service the needs of a specific client is paramount. This includes whether students can demonstrate empathy while remaining in control of the meeting and convince the client that they would be a good fit to serve as their legal representation.

This year’s competition saw students in preliminary rounds having to respond to a very aggressive and self-righteous client who, despite facts pointing to the contrary, believed he/she had done no wrong. In final rounds, students

had to deal with a tight-lipped client who was engaged in some shady business. While both scenarios raised substantive commercial-contract issues, ultimately the pairs who did well went beyond just conveying substantive law, and were actually able to respond to the client’s personality.

The finalists from this year’s competition were: Bill Rosemberg & Michael Garbuz; Hana Dhanji & Leo Kotov; Victoria Yang & Shawn Arksey; Claudia Dzierbicki & David Salter; and David St Bernard & Aron Nimani. Claudia Dzierbicki and David Salter placed first and will be representing UofT at the Canadian Client Consultation Competition in February at Osgoode Law School so wish them luck! Winners at the national level then go on to represent Canada at the international level at the Louis M. Brown and Forrest S. Mosten

International Client Consultation Competition (this year’s competition is in Puerto Rico!)

Participants at all levels in the competition left having had a positive and fun experience and many articulated that they found it a valuable contribution to their legal learning, even helping them in clinic work. Michael Garbuz had this to say about his experience: “The whole experience was really fun, very educational, and I would highly recommend it to everyone in future years!”

Having participated in the competition at the regional and national level last year, we can attest to the valuable skills gained. We are hopeful that in coming years the law school places more value in the development of soft skills like client counselling and we encourage students to learn more about and consider participating in next year’s competition!

FEATURES

6 | JANUARY 29, 2014

ultravires.ca

The Pros and Cons of Exchange DAANISH SAMADMOTEN (3L)

A

few weeks ago, I and the other exchange students returned to U of T Law to a strange new set of buildings. The application deadline for an exchange abroad next year was a little while ago so, naturally, some of us were asked questions about our experiences on exchange. For those of you who weren’t fortunate enough to know anyone who went on exchange or those considering going on exchange the year after next, here are some of the pros and cons. I’ve asked friends who went on exchange to send me pros and cons about their experience, which I’ve included below. The list is not comprehensive but includes what I think are generally the most popular exchanges.

Before I give the specifics of each person’s experience, let me just say a few general things. First, a lot of people wonder if they should go on exchange at all. As I see it, the pros are pretty obvious: experience a different culture, open your mind to different points of view and circumstances, make new friends, better or obtain a

foreign language skill (depending on your exchange), ability to travel around and to a new part of the world, learn new things, take different kinds of classes, less work in school, and so forth. Not to mention, for many of us, this will probably be the last time in our lives where we can just live somewhere else for 4 months without a huge opportunity cost of some kind. While you’re a student, an exchange is basically just going to school somewhere else. Any other time in your life, leaving to live in a foreign country for four months is probably a mid-life crisis or an insane thing to do.

That being said, there are some cons to an exchange: it will likely be more costly than spending the semester in Toronto, fear of missing out, classes might not be as useful or interesting on exchange, shifting your life to another country has administrative difficulties, personal difficulties (long distance relationship or distance from family and friends), foreign language difficulties, culture shock, and so forth. From what I can gather, money is often

LONDON

the biggest con for people. There are ways to minimize the cost though. You can apply to the CIE Bursary program for financial assistance—I personally received $1500 and I know others that received similar amounts. You can also put some additional expenses, like your flight to/from your exchange, on your U of T Law Financial Aid application and ask for special consideration. Most important, watch how you spend your money and save where you can. For example, I went on exchange in London, where you definitely have to pay more for rent and transportation than Toronto but groceries, alcohol, phone/internet plans, and sightseeing tend to be cheaper. Taking into account my bursary and excluding my Eurotrip, I probably only spent around $1000 more during the semester than I would have, if I stayed in Toronto.

On the whole, I think an exchange is a really unique and worthwhile experience and the cons can generally be minimized. Anyways, here are some more specific comments people gave about their exchange.

CENTER FOR TRANSNATIONAL LEGAL STUDIES (provided by Daanish Samadmoten and Karina Wong)

PROS •A ll the other students at school are on exchange as

well so you meet people from all around the world • L ondon is an absolutely amazing city with lots to see and do • Great art, theater, and architecture (a lot of which is free or very cheap to see) • Very few bureaucratic problems (no visa required) • Cheap groceries and cheap phone/internet plans • Amazing public transit system • No language barriers • Locals are very friendly • Easily able to travel around Europe because of the location and the city’s 6 airports • T here is a reading week mid-semester and attendance is not so strict that you cannot travel extensively around Europe

International Presence. Local Essence.

CONS •Y ou go to school with very few British students

so it’s harder to make local friends • The program itself is all about transnational law (not the same as international law), which wasn’t particularly interesting or useful for most people in the program • Rent and transportation are more expensive than in Toronto • Mandatory attendance (with a certain number of allowed misses for each class) • The city is big so walking isn’t always a viable option (though there are tube stops everywhere so it isn’t a huge issue)

Aside from being part of a truly international legal firm, you’ll benefit from practical, hands-on experience and exposure to various areas of practice.

Law around the world

thenortonrosefulbrightdifference.com

FEATURES

ultravires.ca

PARIS

UNIVERSITÉ PANTHÉON-ASSAS (provided by Jan Tominska)

PROS •S tudy with French locals but Paris is also a big destination for

exchange students • Lots of student events to attend • Amazing city with lots to do • School semester is shorter (late September to just before Christmas) • Immersion into the French culture significantly improves French language skills CONS •P aris is an expensive city to live in, especially for rent •S chool work is relatively rigorous and time consuming

AMSTERDAM

HONG KONG

UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM (provided by Marianne Salih)

CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG (provided by David Atia, Ron Trac, Max Laskin, and Alex Fidler-Wener)

PROS •S chool is really easy and located in the heart of the city •C lass schedule is flexible so you can have classes 1 or 2 days a week

• Interesting classes in international law • Great hub for travelling around Europe • Very fun and exciting city to live in and explore; lots of museums, bars, cafes, markets, clubs, etc • Bike lanes are everywhere and bikes are affordable • Most of the locals speak English • Lots of other exchange students at the university • I nternships available at international criminal courts • You can visit the ICC and ICTY in the Hague and watch a trial • A lcohol and “coffee shops” are cheap and accessible • Weather is moderate • Good public transportation system • L ots of city events and festivals throughout the year CONS •A msterdam is more expensive to live in than Toronto

• A lot of stores and other things close early • No centralized shopping centers so you need to shop around in various locations • Takes a while to open a bank account • Academics are not very challenging • Dutch are very straightforward, which can sometimes come off as rude or arrogant

LYON

UNIVERSITÉ JEAN MOULIN (provided by Lisa Tan and Annie Tayyab)

PROS •G reat for those looking to better or obtain French skills without

having to study in French • Lyon is a quintessentially French city, relatively untainted by tourists • Lots of things to do in the city • Once you become friends with the locals, they are extremely genuine and caring • Good public transportation system and rail network • For international law enthusiasts, the professors and adjuncts are great contacts to have • Easy to find a community of Anglophone friends • School administrator can be very helpful in navigating bureaucracy (and is willing to help translate things for students) CONS

• The French bureaucracy is difficult at times • Intermediate level French skills needed to survive on a daily basis • One has to actively seek out opportunities to practice French because the courses are taken with Anglophones • People in the city can often be rude, if your French skills are not up to par • Classes are Masters level and therefore involve a time commitment; take homes on weekends are common • A higher proportion of students fail classes than in North America • Everything is closed at lunch time, late evenings, and Sundays • Difficult to find budget airline flights from the city because the airport is small • Courses are not very deep: they skim the surface of 10 topics related to European and International Business Law

JANUARY 29, 2014 | 7

PROS •H ong Kong is a fantastic city where you can meet a lot of cool people

• The classes are interesting but also fairly easy • Easily able to travel around Asia and surrounding countries • Meet lots of locals and other exchange students • Great beaches, hiking, and nature surrounding the city • Great mix of good affordable food and trendy restaurants CON

• Didn’t make very many friends at school • Hong Kong is an expensive city to live in, especially for rent • Hong Kong is a very commercialized city, which can get a little tiring • Courses not necessarily relevant to your practice as a lawyer • Difficult to interact with some locals because of the language barrier

UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG (provided by Terry Doucet) PROS •H ong Kong is a great city to live in, has a good balance between

Western and Chinese culture • Less culture shock than in cities like Beijing • School is fairly easy; there is 70% mandatory attendance at HKU but only around 12 hours of class a week so still plenty of time for travelling • Hong Kong is a great hub for bouncing around Asia • Easy to use public transit system • L ots of fantastic restaurants around (Yardbird, Din Tai Fung, and Nha Trang) CONS • I f you don’t stay in residence at HKU, it is harder to integrate

with other exchange or local students • Hong Kong is an expensive city to live in, especially for rent

GLASGOW UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW (provided by Emilie Lahaie) PROS •C lasses are generally interesting and challenging but not too difficult

• Lots of social events at the school • Great pubs, bars, and clubs to visit and a strong drinking culture • No language barrier • Great facilities at the university • Glasgow is a great place to live in the UK without the London price-tag (similar cost of living to Toronto) • Easy to travel around Europe from the city • L ocals are friendly and lots of fun to hang out with CONS •O n-campus residence accommodations were pretty bad •M ost of the friends you make at school will be younger, usually

between 20 and 22 years old • It rains quite often • Grades are not bell curved • Mandatory attendance for some classes

Continued from page 5 out a bunch of Cs to compensate for lots of As, or everyone would just get Bs. Instead, they introduced distribution guidelines. Ideally, Pass with Merit is now the grade given out most often, and Low Passes are supposed to be much rarer than Cs because profs are not required to give them out. Interestingly, a few students I spoke to commented that practitioners seem particularly willing to stray from the “everyone at U of T law deserves a gold star” school of thought and will readily dole out Low Passes. Notwithstanding, instructors still have to fall within the prescribed guidelines unless they want to justify their marking to Faculty Council.

The Great Prof Challenge next year will be what to do with those pesky combined program kids who refuse to graduate.

There will only be a handful of students in upper year courses that are still being graded on the old system. Allow me to make a suggestion, professors: just give them all A+. You’ve been through enough with this transition. You deserve a year off.

8 | JANUARY 29, 2014

ultravires.ca

We’re not just looking for exceptional laWyers, We’re looking for exceptional people.

Within our firm you’ll find lawyers who’ve closed billion-dollar deals, represented Prime Ministers and argued precedent-setting cases before the Supreme Court. You’ll also discover adventurers, marathoners and humanitarians. Every year, through our summer and articling programs, we seek out students who, like us, have both a passion for legal success and a desire to push themselves to their limit.

To read our lawyers’ profiles and see if BLG is right for you, visit blg.com/student

Calgary | Montréal | Ottawa | Toronto | Vancouver | Waterloo Region Lawyers | Patent & Trade-mark Agents | Borden Ladner Gervais LLP is an Ontario Limited Liability Partnership.

blg.com BD3639

FEATURES/OPINIONS

ultravires.ca

JANUARY 29, 2014 | 9

Law School: Buy now, pay later?

BRETT HUGHES (1L) & PADRAIGIN MURPHY (1L)

O

ver this past year, there has been an ongoing discussion between students, SLS representatives, and the administration regarding the growing gap between tuition and the availability of financial aid here at the Faculty of Law. Whether or not you have been actively involved in the conversation, you may have noticed some of the results. These include the Dean's town halls and the creation of the SLS Financial Aid working group.

The discussion has been fruitful, and this article is intended to help move it forward by focusing on a possible solution: income-based tuition repayment.

In Australia, most undergraduate students do not need to pay tuition up-front. Instead, the federal government administers a Higher Education Loan Program (HELP), which covers tuition on the front end. The program then requires that graduates repay the loan through income-based payments, which are administered through the tax system. The higher your income, the higher the rate at which you pay back the loan. If you have no income for a time period, you make no repayments. The real value of the loan does not increase because it is only tied to the consumer price index (CPI).

This model dramatically levels the playing field for students pursuing post-secondary education, while at the same time ensuring that everyone bears a relatively equal cost burden for their education.

An income-contingent repayment model could be designed in a number of different ways.

There can be discounts for upfront payment or accelerated repayment. There can be a fixed repayment amount that must be paid back in full, or there can be debt relief after a certain number of years (as with the Faculty’s current back-end debt-relief program).

But why the need for change?

Dean Moran has articulated four ideals that guide the school's approach to tuition and financial aid: (i) offering the strongest program, (ii) ensuring that our school remains accessible regardless of financial need, (iii) ensuring that career choices are not distorted by tuition; and (iv) ensuring that our school reflects the diversity of Canadian communities. Unfortunately, the present system is unable to live up to these ideals in important ways.

First, back-end debt relief is available based only on financial need identified by the financial aid office during your time in the program.

If you did not qualify for financial aid, the school will not help you manage your debt if, for example, a public interest career hinders your ability to make repayments.

Second, tuition levels and trends have made access a serious concern, particularly because credit is not equally available to everyone. There are many reasons for this. Some of us are more burdened by debt than others from undergrad.

Some of us have families to support. Some of us do not have friends or family to cosign for loans.

While these problems do not affect the student population equally, they are acute for those who experience them.

The beauty of an income contingent approach is that it would dramatically mitigate these problems.

It would allow the school to live up to its ideals with respect to accessibility without hindering its ability to fund a world-class law school. The devil would certainly be in the details. We don’t purport to know what the best model would look like, but we do think the options are worth discussing.

For instance, a model like this could be implemented by the provincial government. Compliance would be straightforward, in that deductions would be processed through existing income tax mechanisms. Risk would be broadly distributed across hundreds of thousands of university graduates. Given that rising tuition and ballooning debt loads affect students enrolled in all kinds of programs across the province, this approach could certainly gain traction. In Oregon, for example, the state legislature recently passed a similar plan called “Pay it Forward, Pay it Back,” so the model is already being looked to by policy makers outside Australia. That said, the present political climate and complexity involved in designing and modeling such a program means a provincial approach might not do much for us in the short-term.

So what else can we do?

The University of Toronto Faculty of Law could implement this plan unilaterally. We know; it sounds crazy. But hear us out.

First, enforcement would be different, given

that the school cannot make pay-cheque deductions. Relying on private contracts for tuition (with the possibility of private action in case of default) poses risks and could be time-consuming and expensive. However, UofT law graduates form a tight-knit community with generally well-paying jobs and an incentive to avoid bankruptcy (and the associated risk of being removed from the bar).

Given these factors, compliance and repayment rates for our alumni should far exceed what is possible for a broad-based provincial plan.

Perhaps the trickiest part is financing the upfront cost of such a program. Now that the fundraising drive for our new building is complete, Dean Moran and the administration are looking for the next major project. While we hope that such a drive would focus on financial aid in any case, this alone is not very interesting. And besides, a successful campaign would only buy us a few years of increased student funding. A much more interesting move would be a campaign to front-end making this transition.

An additional possibility would be to seek thirdparty institutions to purchase the student debt, as is already the case for many at an individual level.

The school would be able to negotiate more favourable borrowing terms given the now-consolidated millions of dollars worth of high quality debt.

What do you think? Is this an idea worth pursuing?

Inside the Faculty Council The Faculty Council Approves DANIEL CARENS-NEDELSKY (1L)

T

his months “Inside the Faculty Council” is a special double feature as I report on not one, but two Faculty Council meetings. Be still your beating hearts. For starters, I am very pleased to announce my renewed endorsement of the lunch provided. October’s paltry offering appears to been something of an anomaly. November’s meeting features succulent salmon, chicken, and roasted vegetable sandwiches, while January’s wraps were fresh and stuffed to perfection. Salad and dessert both made strong showings at each event, and tea and coffee helps to take the edge of the winter chill. Attendance too returned to its start of the year level, with barely a spare seat to be seen in November, and even fewer spots available for January’s discussion of curricular reform.

While attendance and food quality were excellent across the two meeting, they showcased a substantial contrast of the roles the council is intended to play. I believe that, at its best, the Faculty Council is a deliberative body where the faculty and students can gather to discuss pressing issues that face the university.

Specialized committees present the results of their long work to the larger law school community, to seek further consultation on thorny issues or approval for fully-fledged suggestions.

This aspect of the Faculty Council was on perfect display this January as the Curriculum Committee presented their interim report on the proposed changes to the curriculum.

The committee members provided a detailed summary of their findings and provisional suggestions in advance of the meeting, while Professor Lee provided a succinct and clear overview of the

committee’s findings, suggestions, and questions, at the meeting itself. This allowed for a focused and informative discussion amongst the faculty and students that was exciting and informative.

The committee was charged with answering three questions: should administrative law be moved to upper years; if yes, what if anything should take its place; and lastly, should first year courses be semestered or full-year (and if so, what would these schedules look like)?

The committee's provisional suggestions based on extensive consultations were that administrative law should be moved, and that addition time should be spent on legal research, writing, and methods. While there was some discussion on whether admin law should be mandatory in second year or not, and on the nature and timing of the additional legal skills training, these suggestions were, as the committee predicted, fairly uncontroversial.

The question of replacing full-year first-year classes with semesters was a much more contentious one. The committee went to the council with not to vet a specific suggestion, but rather to discuss a number of different options the committee had identified as potential options.

This had the advantage of grounding the discussion in specifics, allowing for thoughtful opinions to be expressed and debated in comprehensible manner. Issues ranged from the desirability of having the last two weeks of august dedicated to an intensive first-year legal skills course, to the effect of reducing lecture sizes from 85 to 62 students (while increasing small groups from 16 to 20).

While no consensus was reached, I left the meet-

ing with the impression that some clear directions for further research was provided to the committee, as well as a general sense of the range of opinions and concerns present amongst the students and faculty. Effective, dynamic, and with a true consultative role, it seemed clear to me that it was for meetings like this that Faculty Council was created to be the be governing body of the law school.

In contrast, I believe last November’s meeting showcased some of the least desirable elements of Faculty Council. Despite a robust attendance and a well-fed audience, discussion was minimal and a number of items received a rubber stamp with no possibility of real consultation.

Problems began even before the meeting. Half of the documents under discussion for approval were unavailable prior to the meeting. These included the minutes of the previous meeting and the modification of the JD programs as required by the Law Society.

Previously I had expressed concern with the content of the official minutes and the fact that there was some confusion amongst the students at the meeting as to what exactly the changes to the curriculum entailed. While these are not especially controversial topics, I think it's reasonable for me to request that the governing body of our law school at least theoretically be able to make informed decisions about what it does and does not approve.

A similar issue was apparent with the council’s approval of the addition of an LLM concentration in Health Law. Although the Dean was quick to note that this decision was driven by student demand and only undertaken after significant consul-

tation, it still struck me as undesirable that faculty had no means to truly engage with the question of its desirability at this final crucial juncture.

No prior material regarding its proposal was sent out, and the presentation of it at Faculty Council focused as much on how much prior approval it had already received as it did on explaining the actual nature of proposal. The Dean was surprised to note that a student representative chose to abstain on each of these three votes, but I was surprised more student representatives didn’t.

According the U of T’s website, students make up a third of the voting members of Faculty Council. Yet it seems clear to me that the expectation on students and faculty alike is to approve any and all issues brought before them, regardless of whether they consider themselves reasonably informed or not.

Faculty Council meetings are frequently very interesting, and the reports and updates provided are important information for the faculty and students to have. But after four meetings I have been left with the general impression that rather like October’s unfortunate food, January’s substantive discussion on the changing the curriculum was an aberration not the norm for the council. Obviously in-depth discussion on every single issue that had to approved by Faculty Council would create a bureaucratic nightmare, but I don’t think its too much to ask that the final arbiter of decision making at the law school at minimum be allowed to make informed decisions, rather than be expected to provide a rubber stamp that theoretically reflects the approval of the students and faculty of our school.

OPINIONS

10 | JANUARY 29, 2014

ultravires.ca

My Life in New York MICHAEL PORTNER GARTKE (CLASS OF 2013)

E

ven as I applied to New York firms, I never really expected I’d come here, and as I flew back from my interview, was pretty sure I’d turn my offer down. New York is an enormous, old, dirty and rather intimidating city. Nevertheless, I decided to not wimp out, and have been living here since September, in an 89-year-old apartment building in the East Village of Manhattan.

Both my building and neighborhood – like so much of this city—have tremendous character (which in my building’s case, also meant that my neighbor had a bug problem last fall that briefly became my bug problem). The East Village is at once residential, social and highly liveable, rental rates notwithstanding. It goes without saying that every building is at least 5 stories tall, and most have apartments in them, but the ground floors of every building are made up of restaurants, bars, shops and other services. Since I moved here, I’ve gotten the three best haircuts of my life, each just 4 blocks away and each for less than I paid at Hart House.

New York’s history and density are partly responsible for the creation of diverse neighbor-

hoods such as mine, and are two of the things I enjoy most about the city. Even the subway is over 100 years old—and is still more effective than the TTC. And as absurd as it sounds, I really do think that seeing neat-looking buildings everywhere—instead of drab condos— makes me consistently happier.

When I accepted my offer, I expected I’d eventually bolt back to Toronto, probably within 3-4 years. Four months in, I think that is still my plan.

I loved living in Toronto, all my friends are there, my family is nearby, and I know Ontario law far better than New York law. (Notwithstanding the fact that I’m scheduled to be admitted to the New York bar in February.) In addition, a far smaller proportion of lawyers at my firm make partner than do in Toronto. If anything, they’re going to want me to leave at some point.

And yet…at least once a week, I catch myself thinking a less web-friendly version of “Wow, I can’t believe how freaking cool it is that I live in New York.” Admittedly, this often happens as I walk home from a bar in the West Village, but it also happens between the subway and my office, and even at my office, where I can (actually) see

the Statue of Liberty from my desk.

My desk (or rather, the work I do at it) was, of course, the main reason I came here. I was hired into my firm’s General Practice (corporate) group, and was expecting to work at a torrid pace on a slew of massive, complicated deals. Unfortunately, there was a major slowdown in deal flow last fall, so I ended up spending most of my first 3 months in litigation, writing a memo and doing research for an amicus brief on gun control for a SCOTUS appeal (interesting) and also spending 5 weeks on a document review (less interesting).

While I have since been assigned to a (puny) M&A deal, I will admit that so far the work itself has been somewhat underwhelming. Even so, my work experience overall has been very positive. My firm does a ton of great training and makes a real effort to assign me the kind of work I’m most interested in doing. For my first 18 months, I can do any corporate work I want, after which I’ll be assigned to two practice groups—I’m hoping for M&A and Securities. I wasn’t too busy at first, but I have been working late and doing some weekend work for the past month or so. The New York weekday starts at

9:30 though, which is great for being able to work out before work.

My colleagues—both peers and seniors— have been a pleasure to work with, and I’ve even got a core group of work friends I go out with on Fridays (most of whom are Canadian or French). One less positive side to New York is that I do miss my Toronto friends and have been less quick to make new ones here than I had hoped, although I do have some school friends I see occasionally. In the meantime, I keep myself busy Saturday nights by online dating. (By this I mean I talk to women online on weeknights and go on real dates on Saturdays.)

Unfortunately, I’ve exceeded my wordcount limit, so that’s all there is to say about that.

If you’re interested in working in New York and want to know more, feel free to Facebook the author.

Word on the Street

What do you think about Valentine’s Day In light of the upcoming day of love, we pestered unsuspecting law students innocently hanging out in the Birge student lounge with this hard-hitting, sure-to-be-journalistic-prize-winning question:

Sarah (3L) It’s great because the library is really empty.

Marita (2L) *sighh* I think of Bora.

Mohammed (2L) My moot will be done.

Jeffery (1L) I don’t think about it at all.

Keith (2L) Ambivalent to it.

Katherine (1L) I used to have a family friend who did one nice thing for someone she loved. I like the idea of it being about family.

If you’re single it’s the fucking worst.

Jonathan (3L) I do my best to be out of the country.

Geneviève (1L) Way too many pink hearts anywhere. I don’t care either way. It’s over-hyped. Everybody cares about it a lot less than they make out with all the decorations.

Carlie (3L) I’m okay with it. It’s nice, you tell people you love them, why not.

Danny (2L) The colour pink is underused and it’s a good thing we have a holiday for it.

DIVERSIONS

ultravires.ca

JANUARY 29, 2014 | 11

Smoochers or Studiers

Are These Pairs Real Couples or Just Friends?

ALANNA TEVEL (2L)

1) Max (3L) and Alex (3L)

2) Elliot (2L) and Jacquie (3L)

3) Yale (2L) and Dave (2L)

4) Jeffery (1L) and Katherine (1L)

5) Ryan (2L) and Lauren (2L)

6) Lauren (2L) and Max (2L)

7) Tara (1L) and Victor (1L)

8) Emma (3L) and David (1L) Answer key: 1) Couple 2) Couple

3) Friends 4) Couple 5) Friends

6) Couple 7) Friends 8) Friends

The Most Optimistic Story You’ll Read Today ALEX CARMONA (1L)

T

he biggest refrain we 1Ls tend to hear whenever the subject of summer jobs comes up is just how comically low of a chance any of us have at getting one. I therefore decided to disregard that fact and plow ahead with a much more optimistic topic: What are the various types of 1L summer jobs actually like once you have one? I spoke with upper years Carlie Fox, Christie Campbell, Benjamin Iscoe, and Peter Flyyn, who in their 1L summers worked for DLS, the municipal government, Denton’s and a Professor, respectively, to find out.

What kind of work were you responsible for?

Carlie (DLS) : Summer case workers carry

a full case load—the number of files will vary depending on division. For example, caseworkers in Refugee and Immigration will typically have fewer files than caseworkers in Criminal Law. Although students have all of their work

approved by their supervising lawyers, the buck really stops with students to make sure that files are being handled carefully and diligently and clients are contacted consistently. In addition to file work, all students are expected to join committees. The summer is a great time to implement new initiatives at the clinic, update the wiki and training manuals, and plan events for the school year. Summer students (not just the exec) make all this happen.

Christie (Government): I was responsible

for prosecuting parking and traffic violations.

Stop signs, red lights, and also the occasional drinking in public. This would involve making plea bargains, running trials, and fighting 11b charter motions for delay.

Benjamin (Denton’s): I did a variety of

work. Legal research and drafting various documents (memos, statements of claim, articles, etc.) were the most common duties. Some of the more

interesting things I did in my first year included giving a presentation to the Financial Services Department and editing a CFO's speech to shareholders.

Peter (RA): I worked as a research assistant

for professor Jacob Ziegel. A lot of the RAs do a lot of different work, so it’s dependent on who you’re with. A lot of my work was helping him update one of his Bankruptcy and Insolvency textbook. A lot of that meant going through the drafts of chapters as he updated them, going through the case law, the citations, the articles, making sure that they were up to date for section of the book and making sure he hadn’t missed anything or misspelt anything. A lot of it was content and asking “is this the current state of the law?”

What did an average “day in the life” consist of during your summer?

Carlie: The average day at DLS varies de-

pending on your division. The Crim students were in court several times a week, while most other students are only in court or tribunal several times a summer. Summer caseworkers spend 2-3 hours a week handling the phone intake lines, maybe several hours a week meeting with clients, and the rest of their time doing file work. Summer students also attend several outreach events over the course of the summer.

Most students worked either 9-5 or 10-6 Monday to Friday, and it was rare for students to come in on the weekend. If students did come in on the weekend, it was usually out of hearing prep paranoia.

Christie: When I would arrive at work, I would

pick up my list of people to prosecute for the day, as well as any motions and requests for disclo-

Continued on page 16

12 | JANUARY 29, 2014

OPINIONS

ultravires.ca

Contempt of Course Why Lawyers Are Such Bad Writers DAVID GRUBER (2L)

F

aithful counsel-in-waiting may be taken aback by the title of this week's column.

After all, isn't the written word the essential tool with which the lawyer plies his trade?

Actually, the bar's relationship to language is more complicated than that of a tradesman and his tools. Much the same way nervous adolescents speak so filthily about sex—not as a means of engaging with the subject, but rather in order to avoid it—lawyers seem to prefer detached, qualified references to something called “writing skills”. Indeed the only thing that embarrasses advocates more than talk of great writing is the idea of “justice”. There again they insist on indifferent buzz-phrases like “access to justice”.

One recalls the apocryphal story of the law professor who insisted on the distinction between law and justice. When presented with the challenge that a particular legal concept was unjust, he dutifully marched the entire class outdoors, pointed up to the building's exterior wall, and loudly observed that the sign overhead read “School of Law” and not “School of Justice”.

Fair enough. But if justice isn't the point of law, what other point could there be?

The profession's connection to writing, like its relationship to justice, is one of hostility rather than cooperation. If clear language begets lucid thinking, then bad law will demand convoluted language. So it's no surprise that when the Center for Plain Language issued its report on the various branches of the American federal government, the worst marks went to those departments that are most keen on minimizing

the place of justice in the law (Department of Labor, Securities and Exchange Commission, Drug Enforcement Agency, et cetera).

The difference between philosophy and sophistry is that while the philosopher loves knowledge, the sophist regards it simply as a tool to be used to his advantage. Lawyers needn't trouble themselves over what's the most just or articulate position. That's not the point. Justice and the written word are simply tools in the kit, there to be used when they could benefit the position she's been hired to advocate. Come to think of it, that's the definition of sophistry.

Sophists won't be good thinkers, even if they're occasionally good at thinking. Nor does controlling for “writing skills” necessarily yield a crop of good writers. It produces a class of counsellors who would use weak, tortuous wording to obscure justice just as soon as they would employ robust language to advocate for it.

The essential law course for any would-be wordsmith, scribe or scribbler is Media and Defamation Law (because even in peacetime one must prepare for war). The law—having long since abdicated its role as a guardian of free speech—now through oppressive libel rules —positively insists on gumming up the works.

Even where a person is known definitively to have done wrong, we learn, before he's been convicted it would be inadvisable for the media to refer to him as a “criminal.” It would be more prudent for to reporters to say that he has “committed criminal acts.”

Well what, pray tell, is a criminal if not some-

one who commits criminal acts? This sort of parsing is commonly known as “a distinction worthy of a lawyer.” In reality we're far past that point, and are now trading in distinctions that only a lawyer can see. But much like a voice in your head, if only you can hear it, then it probably isn't there. Adding words without adding thoughts is never a good idea. Not only does it sound silly, but the blow is considerably softened.

The might of the pen can only compare to that of the sword if words are occasionally allowed to be cutting. Loudly denouncing a deserving foe as a “liar” or a “crook” can have a wonderfully scathing effect. But just try inflicting a comparable wound on behalf of justice, while adding the necessary mouthful of qualifiers (“alleged to have committed acts consistent with”). You'll suddenly find that there's no longer any dagger in your sheath, no sword in your scabbard. You'll be left, as the teens say, pushing rope.

Many words, in the legal context, do take on technical definitions. These idiosyncratic interpretations are sometimes called “terms of art,” which is actually just a jargonistic way of saying “ jargon.”

Sometimes a small measure of jargon can be useful for working with technical concepts. But the law abuses this prerogative. For one, law employs few especially technical ideas, preferring instead to complicate simple concepts in an endless serpentine maze of haughty technobabble and opaque gobbledygook.

Assigning to a word a particular meaning doesn't rob it of its general meaning, any more

than standing stubbornly in place keeps the planet from spinning you on its axis. Yet the law has difficulty with this distinction. So when you attempt to breathe some life into a calcified legalism by employing such a radical implement as say, a synonym, you're not just rebellious and deviant and queer, you're actually wrong in point of law. If something is “reasonable” in the legal sense, it is only ever “reasonable” and can never be “sensible” or “rational”, no matter how appropriate the other word may be.

In respect of this tradition I propose replacing the trite “term of art” with a new concept: the farconym (being an acronym for FAncy Rhetorical COnvention with NarY any Meaning).

Jerry Seinfeld said lawyers are like the players of a board game who've read the rules at the top of the box. But it takes a special kind of fussbudget to demand strict adherence to the rules long after the game is over. Perhaps a bit of pedantry is to be expected from the class of citizens who are charged with interpreting the rules. But too often the rules don't just fail to facilitate justice, they also prevent injustice from being approached head-on.

So we find that lawyers are bad writers, not despite their relationship with language, but precisely because of it.

Still, those taken in by the “writing skills” fallacy need not despair.

Nowhere is it written that the most insufferable bore at every dinner party need come from our ranks.

ultravires.ca

OPINIONS

JANUARY 29, 2014 | 13

Point|Counterpoint Is Love Moot?

EMILIE LAHAIE (3L)

POINTNow, before you roll your eyes

and throw your hands up in disgust at the mushy point you assume is coming, hear me out.

My relationship just passed the two-year point (and my bf is no longer quarterback of the law school football team), thus my writing is less clouded by extreme amounts of serotonin and dopamine. However, even without the chemical fireworks of a new relationship, Love wins over mooting any day of the week.

To put it bluntly, a moot is basically a terrible one night stand, but without the good part.

You show up for a 15-minute rush that ends with you sadly walking home alone in your nice clothes, heels clutched in hand. In those 15 minutes strangers successfully exposed your soul, and now you feel naked and confused. You rerun your performance over and over in your mind… did you get that point on section 2(a) quite right? Will they call you for another round? If you had an “on” day and these strangers took a liking to you, you might be lucky enough to win… THAT time. But lets face it, there’s always another round. If you had an off day and your performance wasn’t quite up to snuff, TOO BAD! That summer you spend at

ROBIN MCNAMARA (3L) DLS representing real clients at 1000 Finch?

DON’T MATTER. Just like some shady guy at the Madison (or girl, I’d be the first to admit we can be as shady as the best of them), these judges only care about right now. They don’t know you and they don’t WANT to know you! We all know real world litigation is very VERY rarely like a moot. Sure, it’s another notch on your resume, but was it worth falling six weeks behind in all your classes?

Unlike Mooting, love is the real deal. I’m not just talking the romantic kind. Platonic love, familial love, friendship—all are just as important. Mooting is a fantasyland. Does mooting listen to you after you’ve had a bad day at work?

Will mooting drive you to the hospital because you cut your thumb trying to chop carrots for dinner? I can say, with 100% certainty, that no, mooting will NOT be driving you to the emergency room… or anywhere for that matter (other than to drink/tears).

Final point: Britney Spear’s musical career: “Baby, one more time” vs. “Work Bitch”? No contest.

COUNTERPOINT

There is a tradition in a number of European cities whereby couples lock a padlock (‘love lock’) to a bridge and then throw the key into the river, symbolizing their neverending commitment to one another. When I first took a tour around Paris, the guide pointed to a few keyless combination locks hidden amongst the thousands of rusty metal padlocks: ‘that’s what the real players do,’ he said with a grin. Gotta appreciate that oh-so-French mixture of romance and pessimistic pragmatism!!

Mooting is the combination lock of your romantic and professional life. It prepares you for important challenges without a real person winding up in jail or a corporation losing millions of dollars. Consider a hypothetical. Your girlfriend is yelling at you for not being as handsome, smart, cool, generous or [insert any positive attribute] as Brenden Stevens. What do you do? The same thing you do in response to every judge’s interrogation, no matter how profound or maddeningly off-topic. You take a deep breath, sip your glass of water, compliment her on her thoughtful observation, and then recite the response you scripted out in anticipation of this exact problem.

Another hypothetical. You are Peyton Manning. You just set the single season records for touchdowns and total passing yards, soundly outplayed the one quarterback from your generation whose accomplishments rival your own, and are set to win another Superbowl… that has nothing to do with this article, but how great was it being Peyton Manning?

Look—and this is as honest and direct as I can be writing a satirical column in a law school news-

paper—you will love and be loved when the rest of your life is going well. There is a myth that dating a hottie will save you from whatever other horrible shit is going on in the mess that is your life. Some football quarterback—even one as prone to injury as Emilie’s boyfriend—will come along and make your problems go away. That will never happen.

Preparing for a moot might not be as fun as levelling-up your character on Elder Scrolls III— almost nothing is—but it might help you get the rest of your life in order. If you are interested in litigation, doing a moot can help you figure out if that work is something you actually enjoy and are good at. Figuring that out is what is going to impress someone awesome (along with abs like Jacob Stall, Kelly O’s fashion sense or a reputation for putting out really easily… so pick one).

Emilie has a hilarious take on mooting (and on one night stands… but I can’t think of any newspaper-appropriate jokes about that). Let me offer another analogy. Mooting is your first girlfriend/boyfriend. Yes, she is probably nothing like the girl you end up with. Yes, he takes a lot of your time and occasionally crushes your ego. But you learn lots of things, in a relatively harmless environment, that you should have figured out on your own by now (‘wait, when a t-shirt is covered with stains and moth holes, it is no longer acceptable to wear??’—me c. 2005).

Who knows, maybe you even meet your romantic partner through mooting. The hottest fires make the strongest steel, and moots can get pretty intense rushing to write a factum for the first time. It worked for Mike Ross and Rachel Zane on Suits, and we all know that show faithfully represents the reality of legal practice.

14 | JANUARY 29, 2014

ultravires.ca

Move from the classroom to the courtroom.

If you’ve set your sights on a career in litigation, you want to apply all that you’ve learned so far where it really counts – in court. At Lenczner Slaght, you’ll spend more time preparing and presenting cases, guided by highly respected lawyers who can help you develop and polish your advocacy skills. As Canada’s leading litigation practice, we don’t just offer you more firsthand courtroom experience – we insist on it.

OPINIONS

ultravires.ca

JANUARY 29, 2014 | 15

Backlash Brewing in English Canada?

BENJAMIN SHARMA (3L)

A

fter the ice storm, half the power to my house was cut off. I had no working furnace but I did have high-speed internet and hot water. This meant I had lots of time huddled near a space heater, and therefore lots of time to think about this and that.

Shivering under wool blankets, I got to thinking about every-day language usage and how it changes over time. I was born in Toronto and raised in the Annex. What was normal usage for kids on the playgrounds of the Annex in the 1980s has not necessarily stayed normal usage for us, their grown-up selves and/or their successors as local residents.

For those kids on the playground, the proper pronunciation of “nuclear” was “nucular”, most often used when talking about the prospect of “’nucular’ war”. I was the iconoclast then who insisted on “nu-cle-ar”. (I’ve often gone my own way.) Now, of course, almost everyone in the area has gone my way, and it’s as if the past never was. But I remember it well; I can hear it in my memory to this day.

Another verbal tic that seems to have ended up in the ash-heap of Annexian history is this: when someone would say something that one totally disagreed with, or when some practice of other people was noted that one found totally and utterly baffling, a common response was to shrug one’s shoulders and say something along

the lines of, “Well, it’s a free country”. One doesn’t hear that phrase tossed about so much any longer.

“It’s a free country” is a shrugging-off phrase with a history. One can see it interrogated by a German observer of England in the late 1930s— that particular writer took pains to demonstrate how England was NOT a free country (to his mind), and most certainly not for the working class sorts who would tend to toss that line out in conversations with him, no doubt after some disagreement about politics or some such thing.

I noticed the disappearance of the phrase in part because it indicates a disappearance of the attitude underlying it—the ability to shrug one’s shoulders at the strange things that others think and do, and simply move on with one’s life.

I thought of it again when the news of the religious accommodation debate at York University came up—a student in a correspondence course apparently asked his professor to excuse him from a meeting requirement for his class, because his religious views precluded (so he said) social contact with members of the other sex. The professor demurred; the university administration overruled him; the professor ignored his dean’s order and went to the media about it. Armies of editorial writers and Facebook posters are outraged, by the York University administration’s stance and are standing

with the professor. (The student, incidentally, thanked the professor for his consideration even though he was ruled against, and complied by attending the required meetings with his classmates.)

The position of York’s administration is actually quite simple—the test for whether a religious objection should be accommodated is whether, first, the belief is sincere, and, second, the accommodation can be done without imposing undue hardship on the other students.

There was no reason to believe the student was not sincere, and another student had been excused from the meeting requirement because he or she was living far away at the time. If granting the other student an exemption did not impose undue hardship on the other students, granting one more for these beliefs could not impose undue hardship either. By this view, within reason (i.e., it not hurting other students’ educational experience), it isn’t for York to judge its students’ religious beliefs.

Many Canadians apparently do not share that outlook. They do judge, and in their view, the university had no business humouring “religious” views of the student that they deem extraordinarily silly or possibly even demeaning.

One political scientist who has taught at a few law schools put voice to this view in the pages of the Globe and Mail—“common sense has fallen

to the wayside in dealing with anything that threatens to offend a campus member’s personal sensibilities”. (Emmett Macfarlane, “The fear of offending is sapping the universities of common sense”, The Globe and Mail, 10 January 2014.) “Common sense” in this case means not accommodating requests that touch on equality rights, or “certain basic societal values”, even if they would not have had an impact on other students’ lives at the university.

In the fall, there was a lot of discussion in English Canada about Quebec’s proposed secularism charter. Lots of it involved clucking our tongues and marveling at the intolerance on display in Quebec. I would suggest that the reaction to the situation at York shows that similar issues are live ones in the rest of Canada as well, even if we are not inclined to go as far in the direction of formal secularism as many Quebecers. That York student’s desire to opt out has struck many as unacceptable, as did the university’s view that it should be accommodated. Whatever conclusions we may eventually come to, it is clear that many English-speaking Canadians are not shrugging their shoulders at issues of “reasonable accommodation” any longer.

The Health and Wellness (Student Advisory) Committee Haters Gonna Hate WEBNESH HAILE (3L)

A

good polemic is the thinking person’s TMZ clip of Miley Cyrus twerking with Robin Thicke, complete with catty voiceover. I love them as much as the next law student or desperate housewife. So it was with great relish that I stumbled across Ultra Vires’ delightfully polemical November 27th opinion piece, “Contempt of Course: Disband the Health and Wellness Committee!”

In service of the valuable dialogue it has created, allow me to present a potentially more balanced but proportionally less entertaining view of what the Health and Wellness Student Advisory Committee (HWSAC) is, and what it is not. (Full disclosure: the author is a member of the 2013-2014 Health and Wellness Committee who advocates for developing substantive solutions for serious mental health issues, but who also quite likes smoothies.)

First, the HWSAC is just one of many health and wellness programs ongoing at the Faculty of Law. In the Fall 2013 semester alone, multiple substantial mental health initiatives were introduced or continued by the Faculty.

In September, the Faculty welcomed its first Student Programs Coordinator, Sara-Marni Hubbard, whose considerable experience developing supportive student programs includes roles

at U of T’s Faculty of Engineering and Sexual and Gender Diversity Office.

Also in September, a dedicated professional counsellor from U of T’s Counselling and Psychological Services was made available to law students for individual counselling, psychotherapy, cognitive behavioural therapy and psychiatric medication. The service has seen demand double this year, its second year of operation.

Taking a more holistic approach, a new Elderin-Residence discussion series was introduced in October through the Aboriginal Law Program.

The program is open to all students.

Even without the benefit of hindsight I can see how doggie days would be more likely to go viral, though.

Second, the HWSAC is the law student voice on mental health and wellness at the Faculty.

Many existing initiatives, including those most frivolous, have their origins in suggestions made

by HWSAC student members.

The HWSAC comprises fifteen students from a variety of backgrounds who volunteer to discuss health and wellness issues and solutions monthly with the administration.

If you received free massages and green smoothies instead of fully loaded hip flasks and Xanax sample packs during the December 2013

exam period, you can blame this group of peers.

In January 2014, however, this same group also hosted a dedicated 1L Curriculum Consultation to ensure that the proposed 1L curriculum modifications meaningfully address the structural problems that perennially distress many of our newest law students, including unreasonable course loads. The new proposal, as developed by the administration, already incorporates wellness concerns.

Third, the HWSAC institutionalizes discussion and action on law student mental health and wellness issues, ensuring that they remain top of mind for the administration and that iterative progress is made.

At the first HWSAC meeting of year, some student members argued that more thoughtful, substantial initiatives were still needed to support students suffering from serious, ongoing distress.

To that end, the Faculty will be participating in the new 18 -month Ontario Law Student Mental Health Initiative which connects law schools across the province in developing meaningful mental health supports for their students.

Each HWSAC meeting is an ideal forum for evaluating proposals and collecting feedback from a sample student population willing to donate intensive time and effort to this initiative.

Four years ago, there was no health and wellness programming. Three years ago, the HWSAC did not exist. In these dark ages, buried deep in the annals of recent history, "health and wellness at the law school" was a hilarious oxymoron moaned about by people who just couldn’t cut it. Progress has been made on many fronts.

Nevertheless we acknowledge that much work lies ahead, and encourage you to channel your restive energies into getting involved.

Come to a HWSAC meeting. They’re advertised through Headnotes. Get in touch with Sara-Marni Hubbard, our Student Programs Coordinator. Join the Ontario Law Student Mental Health Initiative Facebook page to contribute your ideas or fill out a survey to provide feedback.

But seriously, don’t complain to us about work-life balance as a practicing lawyer. Go chirp LSUC with that sh*t.

16 | JANUARY 29, 2014

OPINIONS

ultravires.ca

The Uproar on Reasonable Accommodation at York is not about Gender Equality; It’s about Racism LOUIS TSILIVIS (3L)

T

he story has been well played out in the Canadian media: a student taking an online course at York University asks to be exempt from group work so he will not have to interact with female students, contra his religious beliefs; the professor raises objections; the university administration overrules the professor and heeds the student’s wishes.

The backlash was immense, with the general tone of comments being that someone’s religious beliefs and our accommodation of those religious beliefs should stop at the point of “gender equality”.

Look: The accommodation requested (exemption from group work) was entirely reasonable. This costs the university and does not negatively impact any other student. A similar request to be exempt from on-campus group work was actually granted to a student who lived quite far away from York. Most importantly, it respects the religious beliefs of the student in question, allowing him to pursue his education without compromising his faith.

And then here’s the real problem with the criticism: This has nothing to do with gender equality.

Female students of York University are in no ways disadvantaged by attempts to accommodate this student’s religious beliefs.

Across Canada, there are churches, synagogues, and temples that forbid women from administering religious services or that bar them from accessing and advancing in the hi-

erarchies of those religious institutions. These are violations of gender equality; they discriminate against women and prevent them from enjoying the privileges and opportunities that men enjoy in such religious communities.

And so there is immense public backlash against one student’s religious rights claim that does not disadvantage women in any way— that his request is repugnant and beyond the pale—while at the same time there is societal acceptance of places of worship that ban women from the clergy.

In one situation, the public says that religious beliefs should not be accommodated at all because one student holds a belief that he should not interact with members of the opposite sex; in the other situation, the public is entirely comfortable with an actual and quite severe violation of gender equality.

Simply put, it is because the majority is used to gender inequality in religious institutions— it’s familiar, it’s held by their religion (or the religion of their ancestors), and it’s part of the culture and history of the majority—and they are not used to that student’s views. The inconsistency is simply the product of wanting to think that our own practices and culture is normal and enlightened and acceptable and that the “other” is weird and barbaric and we should draw the line.

When the public is entirely inconsistent and consistently claims the moral high ground, it’s really nothing more than a refusal to look at

religious issues critically and an insistence that our way is better than everyone else’s and that people who are different are morally abhorrent.

Consider the debate over religious symbols in Québec: the public sphere must be entirely secular and no displays of religion are acceptable, says the Marois government, with the support of much of the Québec public. Turbans and headscarves are obvious threats to Québec’s secular values, but an enormous cross atop Montréal’s Mount Royal and a large crucifix behind the chair of the Speaker in provincial legislature are apparently totally acceptable. Despite the fact that overtly Roman Catholic symbols dominate the skyline of the province’s biggest city and literally hang over the Speaker’s chair in the National Assembly, these are not threats to the secular order because they are part of Québec’s “history” and “culture”.

The irony of attacks on religious minorities, whether they are done in the name of gender equality, or secularism, or to further integration, is that they often backfire and usually work against the goals they were enacted to advance. When religious groups feel under attack and when they are singled out and othered, they usually turn inward, become more insular, and become alienated with the rest of society. Reformers within those faiths are seen as traitors who are trying to undermine a faith under siege from the inside.

Enlightenment thought is the triumph of reason over arbitrariness. The inconsistency in

Continued from page 11

happy. So for me it was good because if I wanted to go off on a weekend I could work a bit more Monday to Thursday, get my 35 hours in and I could take a Friday off. In terms of supervision, he was very hands-off. We met once a week and would go for lunch together and chat about the progress, about life general, about legal stories.

But the relationship will really depend on the kind of professor you end up working with.

about this process and it validates that you're on the right track. There's also all the firm outings they take students on which any summer student will eagerly discuss. My least favourite part [is that] when starting researching, it's a great abyss. It almost always takes a bit of time until I can hop on the research trail I want to be on. Although no one expects an answer to a complex research question right away, I still have this defeatist feeling for the first bit. The flip side is that once I finally found something that discusses what I wanted it opened up so many doors and the exercise starts to become a lot of fun.

sure. I would then go to the courtroom, and talk to all the defendants or their representatives to see how they wanted to proceed (guilty plea, trial, or adjournment). When court started, I would call people to the front of the court and then we would proceed with the guilty plea, trial, or adjournment.

Benjamin: It really varied day-to-day. Usually

there would be some assignment on the go, so when I got into the office, I would pick-up where I left off. If there is ever a situation where I finished something the night before and had a clear plate the next morning, I would come in a little bit later, and then knock on doors to see where I could help out (either other students or practitioners).

Peter: It was really self-directed. I prefer work-

ing a bit later usually so I would try to get to school for about 11, on the days that I did go to school, because you can work from home (though that depends on your prof). We had a bunch of RAs that would hang out together at a table, everybody sits there and does their research and has a little chat. Then lunch, then keep working on the chapter I was working on. Then go home, and maybe do some more work after supper. It’s very self-directed. However many hours you have a week, you can get them done however you want to get them done. I worked with a very flexible professor—as long as I got the work done he was

What was your favourite (and least favourite) part of your job?

Carlie: My favourite aspect of being at DLS

was the degree of control we had over our files.

For those of us heading to large firms, we likely won't be in that position again for many years.

Christie: Favourite: the practical experience and

opportunity to be on my feet all day everyday in a court. Least favourite: the steepness of the learning curve. And parking court on a bad day.

Ben: I really liked the environment—I actually

liked the work. It was challenging and stimulating. I was asked questions about legal issues that no one knew the answer to. I had to figure out how to effectively go through a variety of resources to get the answer. Bit by bit this vast world of the unknown becomes more focused, and at the end of the day you come back to a topnotch lawyer with an answer to a question they didn't know. There is something very gratifying

Peter: My favourite part was getting a chance

to really talk to professor Ziegel—I really enjoyed those lunches. I miss those—it was a really good opportunity to get to know him on a personal basis. My least favourite was probably footnote checks. It’s monotonous, you have to look through every single one. And footnote checks include making sure all the cross referencing is correct. It’s a big hassle looking through every single cross-reference to make sure they all correctly line up to the correct citations.

What is one piece of advice about your type of job, or 1L jobs in general, that you think every 1L should know?

Carlie: Book your days off on your first day! If

you don't, you'll end up with court appearances

how we deal with religious beliefs—depending on whether they are our beliefs or the beliefs of the minority—exposes our society as arbitrary and illiberal on matters of religious accommodation. And yes, it exposes much of the (extremely inconsistent) outrage as racist.

So please: Do not disguise shameful and arbitrary attacks on religious minorities as efforts to advance liberal values. They are affronts to the very concept of liberalism and Enlightenment.

all over the place and you'll feel like you don't have any weeks during which you can take vacation.

Christie: Apply to everything, and try to get

some experience doing what you are interest in.

But if you don't, that is perfectly fine too—it will all work out.

Ben: You're not expected to know everything

about the law; in many cases there is no assumption that you know anything about the law. There is no harm in saying "I don't know" (I said it a lot). Also, don't feel pressured into doing a 1L firm job.

Peter: Make the most out of it. You get a lot out

of the RA position that you put into it. If you have an interest in the area that you’re working in, or even if you don’t and you find an interest, it makes your work a lot more enjoyable. So rather than looking at it like “Oh, it’s a tough slog, I have to go through all this and read a bunch of chapters today”, look at it as an opportunity. It’s the summer, it’s not as hard as a 1L firm job, it’s an opportunity to grow and explore something that you’re not getting graded on but are responsible for. Take you’re time, get into it and actually start to enjoy reading about that area of law. Sometimes you might not be interested in the specific work you’re doing on a specific day, but try to find your Muse each and every day for what you’re doing.

ultravires.ca

OPINIONS/DIVERSIONS

JANUARY 29, 2014 | 17

1L Hire

in St. Elmo's Fire—go to town! I can hear that sweet sax riff now.

—Dr. V Dear Dr. V, Valentine’s day is coming up and I want to do something special for my lady friend, but I’m pretty broke. Do you have any ideas?

—Shoulda gone to Queens

JACQUIE RICHARDS (3L)

L

ast year, law firms hired 44 people in the 1L summer recruitment process, from seven law schools across Canada. 19 were from U of T law. This is a slight increase from previous years, and recent years have seen new firms participating in the 1L hiring process—Cassels Brock joined four years ago and BLG in 2013. Moreover, some firms seem to be hiring ever more 1ls—Davies hired a whopping 9 for the 2013 summer. “Word on the street” is that 1L jobs are growing in number and will continue to do so. As was noted in Precedent Magazine’s 2014 Summer Job Watch, the 1l hire seem to be of increasing importance. Leigh-Ann McGowan, Assistant Director of Professional Development and Student Programs at Cassels Brock, noted concerns about “missing out on interesting, dynamic candidates that would otherwise be snapped up by other firms during the first-year process”, and Robyn Marttila, Director of the Career and Professional Development Office at Western Law, stated that “if firms see that top talent is being snapped up and they feel the pool is a bit diluted, then I think they will jump in for that 1L hire”.

1Ls seem to be taking cues from this. Resume and interview seminar attendance for the “1L hire” is at record highs, applications continue unabated and 1L students are, you know, doing what 1Ls do best—taking the process extremely seriously and FREAKING. THE FUCK. OUT. However, as a 2.5, my message to 1Ls is this—stop.

Don’t stop building your resume, carefully writing and editing cover letters and attending firm tours to learn about different cultures.

Don’t stop researching and certainly don’t stop applying—the 1L process is a phenomenal opportunity to get “familiar” with law jobs, get your application materials in order for OCIS and, if you’re lucky, get practice interviewing.

For a very small group of people, it’s an “early in” for an articling job and a great opportunity to get more practical firm experience before graduating.

But, 1Ls, stop freaking out. Please. In reality, the odds of actually getting a “genuine” 1L job are incredibly slim, and the purpose of the 1L hire, despite the hype, is not to to “skim off the best” or gradually shift towards an earlier, higher pressure hiring process with even less information available for applicants than the OCI process typically provides.

Instead, the process looks more like an opportunity to give early jobs to those with genuine experience and who have had opportunity to figure out what they want. Look at the (incredibly limited) statistics. Of the 19 law students hired through the 1L recruit last spring, 10 were JD/MBA’s—not even 1Ls in the strictest sense of the word. JD/MBA “1LS” have a full year of grades and have had the opportunity to watch their classmates go through OCIs before applying. Of the remaining group, most 1L hires had business backgrounds or extensive career experience prior to law school: of the 9 actual 1L jobs offered, the most pervasive common ground between the recipients seemed not to be grades but extensive business/ managerial experience.

So, 1Ls. Chill. You’ll have plenty of time to freak out next fall.

Dear Dr. Valencourt Vicki Valencourt, gorgeous model/singer/dancer/sex expert, has been around the block and back. From late night infomercials to Vanna White’s stand in Episode 2: Season 3, (original air date November 9 1985), she boasts an impressive resume. She’s here to answer every burning question U of T law’s got with her trademark candour and infinite wisdom.

Dear Dr. V, I have the biggest crush on a 1L....but I'm a 3L! Is this romance too-taboo?

—Cougar Town

Honey if you think that’s taboo you’ve clearly never let a couple of geriatrics have their way with you. Which is a must, in my opinion. Archie and Edith taught me more in one night than I ever learnt at the Brass Rail. You should relish your opportunity to teach a fresh-faced novice a thing or two about proper manual stimulation and introduce them to the finer things in life, like anal beads. First year law students are known to be two pump chumps. They need guidance and nurturing to become the sick sexual deviants that second years are. So hurry up and teach the kid what a good rusty trombone is. The entire 1L class will thank you.

—Dr. V

and way past the club's heyday...it mostly attracted expensive hookers and professional poker players at that point), but I had just had my daughter and was sporting some pretty severe stretch marks.

Anyway, the point is, Stanley looked me square in my pupil-dilated eyes and told me—Babe, I'd still let you blow me in the alley out back! He was always such a sweetheart. The moral of this little Hollywood tale is you've got to do what's in your heart. Maybe that means touching tongues at the library with your new hot lady friend, maybe it means swinging your still-bloated belly around under the disco lights of a once-legendary nightclub. Whatever it is that lights your inner fire, you've got to just run with it.

Grab your good-looking girlfriend and treat her like she's a saxophone and you're Rob Lowe

Dear Shoulda, First off, don't ever talk about going to Queens.

The girls there only give handjobs and anything you'd save on tuition you'd lose in self respect. It's basic math. And trust me, as a onetime soap star, I know nothing about math.

For Valentine's Day, I've got three words for you, darling: Jabba The Hutt. Step one, get her Carrie Fisher's costume from Return of the Jedi when she's tied up with the Hutt. To save money, I'll lend you mine, but—full disclosure—it might smell a tad!...I haven't cleaned it since 1989 and I went to that Carrie Fisher-themed coke orgy (I was personally invited by Mark Hamill). Those were the days, I'm telling you. Enough blow to keep me up all night and then the next day while I fake-cried and slapped my co-stars at work.

Step two, tie her up in costume, and then gorge yourself on cheeseburgers and fried chicken until you get a good Jabba-esque bloat going. Then it's bone-town, population you and your lady friend.

It's the perfect way to spice up v-day.

Let me know if you want to take it even further and add a friend ;). I may not be as young as I used to be, but I'm sure as shit still blonde, and horny as hell. I'll include my business card when I send you the Carrie costume in case you want to get in touch (it includes a picture of my cleavage, and if that won't convince you, what will!). Maybe I should mention, I have a Chewy costume that I'd love to bring into the mix. Don't be shy!

—Dr. V

Dear Dr. V, I got really average marks last semester. Am I a total failure?

—Every law student

Why do you even care? You’re at the Ford Models of law schools. So what if there’s a couple gals whose hip bones stick out more than you. Most of them end up ODing or knocked up with some sleazy photographer’s baby in them. And once they inevitably crash and burn all of a sudden your poor man’s version of “Hey Big Spender” is looking like center stage material. Realistically, when the lights go up, they just need a warm body on stage. You think you need an H in contracts to do due diligence? My sister Darlene could do that shit and she only got to third grade before she went full time pageant star.

If you’re really feeling like you’ve been shit on by the world you should just throw on some Duran Duran, put on your best sequined heels and go to town on yourself. That little ritual helped me get rid of my barbiturates addiction. Plus I don’t booty call Gary Busey nearly as much anymore, thank god. There’s only so many rim jobs a person can give in a night.

—Dr. V Dr. V, This girl and I just started dating and we’re really into each other. Like she is The One. And we look so good together, it’s insane.

But people have been ripping on us for our PDA—what’s with the haters?

—Life sentence and loving it

Dear Life sentence, As my onetime lover MC Hammer once told me, haters gonna hate! He was of course referring to the time I got booed out of Studio 54 for dancing on a platform without a shirt on. Which normally would be fine for the Studio (it was the late 80s

© 2012–2014 Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP. All rights reserved. | 416 869 5300

Cassels Brock 2013/2014 season

Ultra Vires student ad “Doodle - Resolve Disputes” quarter page portrait, b&w

Contact: Heather Murray hmurray@casselsbrock.com 416 869 5782 - fax 416 642 7137

Please PRINT a hard copy of the file and either FAX it or SCAN and EMAIL it back to me, thanks!

DIVERSIONS

18 | JANUARY 29, 2014

ultravires.ca

Human Rights Program Brings Justice to Developing World DAVID GRUBER (2L)

S

tudent volunteers with the Global Human Rights Law Program (GLHRLP) returned home to cheers and high praise Sunday after solving a major international legal crisis.

Each year, the GLHRLP hand-picks a number of University of Toronto Faculty of Law students to travel abroad and furnish under-developed nations with high-quality legal services, despite being unqualified to practise law in their home country.

“This is so, like, overwhelming,” said Katie March, 2L. “You go over there thinking you're just one intern, you can't change the world. But then you see the looks on people's faces once you've imported the Anglo-American justice system, and maybe even helped solve a major geopolitical dilemma in the process, and you realize one person really can make a difference.”

March was part of a team of four interns who headed to the small West African nation of Biafra in order to study its failing legal system, and possibly author a research paper on strategies for law reform, based on their combined seven years of law school experience.

Upon arrival, the team of eager future-law-

yers faced a small setback upon discovering that the experimental secessionist state had been dissolved in 1970. Nevertheless, they continued working, fearing their funding could be withdrawn if university officials discovered they had funded a project for a country that no longer exists.

“The Wikipedia page on International Human Rights Law is quite extensive,” March explained, adding, “Don't get me wrong, we didn't just copy from Wikipedia. We looked at some of the footnotes on the Wikipedia page too.”

“We basically critique the Nigerian government's disregard for international law, and stress the importance of fairness and equality, and the rule of law.”

Before long, the paper had gone viral. Their findings were reported in the Nigerian press, and they were asked to comment on Nigerian radio, and even address the Nigerian parliament.

“This is a great paper,” said one magazine vendor in Lagos. “I showed it to my wife, and she agreed it was well-written and properly footnoted.”

March's final internship report, which she reportedly wrote in a mad dash on the eve of her deadline, has become popular reading on the

Can you say L'awkward?

LISANA NITHIANANTHAN (1L)

That Lawkward Moment When…Niblett calls on unsuspecting 1Ls on the first class of the first day back to school.

That Lawkward Moment When…Niblett calls on unsuspecting 1Ls on the first class of the first day back to school and accurately gets the right name and the right person.

That Lawkward Moment When…upperyears laugh at the fact that frosh take the 1L Summer Employment so seriously that they break out in hives about the prospect of not being employed for the summer.

That Lawkward Moment When…you finally understand upperyear wisdom/advice from O-Week, (that “Admin is a class about nothing” after attending the anomaly that is Admin class and not understanding what was happening).

That Lawkward Moment When…your prof prefaces exam handout with a disclaimer to “refrain from attaching self-worth to exam grades” and you do exactly that.

That Lawkward Moment When…family and friends ask you how your exams went and you don’t know how to explain because of the weird scale and also because you aren’t quite sure.

That Lawkward Moment When…a panelist at the CDO Resume/Cover Letter Sessions says she looks for “resilience” on your cover letters but you hear “Brazilians” and wonder how to possibly convey that in your application paper in utter confusion.

That Lawkward Moment When…discover a new scientific unit of measurement CU, “Chapman Units”.

That Lawkward Moment When…you actually believe the “new year, new me” mantra was inspiring.

That Lawkward Moment When… it’s been 24 days since New Year’s and exactly 24 days since you broke your New Year’s Resolutions.

That Lawkward Moment When…you no longer believe the “new year, new me” mantra and see it for the self-deception strategy it truly is.

That Lawkward Moment When…you get your ‘failsafe’ exams and you feel like you still failed.

That Lawkward Moment When…speak to a mentor about school/life balance and they die laughing.

That Lawkward Moment When…you get your exams back and feel good about them and everyone and their aunt tells you to not get so cocky because those don’t count for shit.

That Lawkward Moment When…your friends ask when you’re free to hang out…and you never are.

That Lawkward Moment When… I spent more time concocting this literary gem instead of doing my Crim readings.

Nigerian street. Sources say it has been widely circulated at high-level meetings of both the ruling and opposition factions.

Experts say the paper has sparked debate in the disadvantaged country, leading to a change in zeitgeist that could serve as a catalyst for dramatic civic reform.

The Nigerian government asked the team to remain in the country in order to help draft a new constitution, but the students were not able to get excused from the coming semester.

“We have a very strict policy about internships abroad,” said Archdean Valarie Henson.

“Students may only do a maximum of one semester away from U of T. Regrettably no exceptions are permitted.”

“That being said, we do recognize that bringing the rule of law to a needy country is also an important objective,” Henson added.

An unofficial spokesperson for Dean Mayo Moran said the dean was too overcome with pride to talk to reporters, but said that the entire administration was, “giddy and full of excitement.”

“This is great advertisement for the Faculty of Law,” the spokesperson said, adding that good press may enable administrators to jack up tu-

ition to even greater heights.

“This just goes to show the tremendous success that U of T students can achieve,” the spokesperson said. “Our students make tremendous contributions to the legal community, from volunteering to helping those who can't be bothered to earn enough money to pay for their own lawyers, to importing some elementary ideas about law and give order to that unmitigated cluster&*^% that is the justice system in the developing world.”

When asked if she planned to continue doing human rights work after graduation, March was uncertain. “Repairing a failing legal system was an amazing experience, and made some great life-long friendships.” she said. “But to be honest, I was making more money during my year off in Paris where I was working as an au pair.”

Characters From Famous Legal Cases Where Are They Now? PALOMA VAN GROLL (2L) & ALANNA TEVEL (2L)

Donoghue v Stevenson After May Donoghue successfully sued a manufacturer for bottling a snail inside her ginger beer, a lightbulb went off in her head. May has been spotted raking in free meals across the globe. Her secret? Bringing snails with her to every restaurant and slyly placing them inside her drink.

Palsgraf v Long Island Railroad Company After getting off scott-free, the employee of Long Island Railroad Co. has since been arrested for recklessly setting off fireworks in crowded movie theatres. When reached for comment, Ms. Palsgraf only said “I told you so”.

R v Oakes After escaping a trafficking possession charge in Canada, Oakes (in an attempt to escape the

notoriety he gained from being the subject of a major Supreme Court case) moved to Colorado and helped found the movement that recently got weed legalized in the State. He lives with his wife and three children and their dog Shifting Onus.

Peoples and BCE After coming before the scrutiny of the Supreme Court and becoming part of the biggest muddling of business law that U of T's Professor Macintosh has ever witnessed, the Directors of Peoples Inc. and BCE Inc. started a sweat lodge in Northern Manitoba where they go to "get away from it all." They invite the Professor up every year, but he's too bitter about having to teach this part of the law to ever go.

DIVERSIONS

ultravires.ca

JANUARY 29, 2014 | 19

Raw Chocolate Brownies YALE HERTZMAN (2L)

I

wanted to begin this article by saying that these brownies are good enough for Lady Godiva. I then realized that I have no idea who Lady Godiva is, or why her name is affiliated with chocolate. It turns out that Lady Godiva was a woman who ran naked through the streets of Coventry to protest the imposition of heavy taxes by her powerful husband (Lord Leofric) on his subjects. This story of bravery, courage, and nudity inspired the Godiva Chocolatier name.

These raw chocolate brownies will similarly make you want to run through the streets naked. They will also give you the confidence to do so because they are entirely raw. They contain no flour, sugar, bacon, or butter. You will be more prepared for a nude protest than you have ever been. So in the spirit of Valentine’s Day and Lady Godiva, grab your dates (no pun intended), walnuts, cacao powder, and salt, and get started.

Ingredients 2 cups of walnuts (or any other nut of choice) 1 cup of almonds 2 ½ cups of dates (around 30 dates) 1 cup of cacao powder ¼ cup of salt Optional additions: shredded coconut, chocolate chips, cacao nibs, goji berries, rainbow sprinkles

Steps • In a food processor, mix the 2 cups of walnuts until finely chopped.

• Add in the cacao powder and salt. Mix until dispersed.

• While the food processor is running, add the dates (make sure that you remove the pits) through the feed tube of the food processor.

• Chop up the almonds into fine pieces.

• In a large bowl, mix the chopped almonds with the mixture from the food processor using clean hands.

• L ine a baking dish with parchment paper. Transfer the mixture to the dish, patting the mixture down.

• Add in any optional additions. Store in the freezer.

Be who you are.

Law is what we do, but it doesn’t define us. We’re looking for individuals who are passionate about everything in life, including being a lawyer.

If this sounds like you, please check us out at www.torys.com to learn more about us.

DIVERSIONS

20 | JANUARY 29, 2014

10 Reasons to Date a Law Student

LISANA NITHIANANTHAN (1L)

B

race yourselves. It’s that time of year when you’re about to be reminded of your forever alone status. Aka that girl you had to do a group project with in your 3rd year of undergrad? Yup, she just got engaged and is humblebragging about it on Facebook, any store you walk into will be attacking your vision with hearts, flowers, rainbows, cuddly stuff, and any spa you go to get away from the stress of it all will have a couple’s package that you can’t choose. Turn on the radio and the radio gods hate you. Fear not, there is enough time from now until the Day That Shall Not Be Named that you can find a Significant Other and avoid going to bed with contempt for love and a bottle of “well-being” (formerly known as wine). UV is going to help you, yes YOU, dodge that bullet. The solution to all your problems lies somewhere between Falconer and Vic College. Date a Law Student. No, seriously. Dating a Law Student will be the best decision you’ve made and here’s why:

1. Free Legal Consultation Information

If you ever end up in a bind, your Law Student SO will have the legal information you need to get out of it (hopefully). And you don’t have to pay them for it, free legal help information? I think this speaks for itself. *Law students are not authorized to give out legal consultations

2. They’re Rich…or Will Be Soon Enough Even accounting for the massive amount of debt from law school, Law Students will be rich. They’ll eventually be lawyers and lawyers make money. Lots of it.

3. Attorney-Client Privilege How does this relate to a non-legal relationship? Well, they know the rules and that means they know what you confide in them stays privileged. Your secrets are safe with them.

ultravires.ca

Professor Celebrity Look-A-Like of the Month ANONYMOUS

4. They Dress Well.

Have you ever heard of a poorly-dressed lawyer? No, because there has never been one. And lawyers are the evolved form of Law Students (who also are never poorly-dressed except maybe during exams but those don’t count).

5. They’re SUPER Busy.

Law students have a million things going on and will be pre-occupied with that. Too pre-occupied to be clinging to your very existence and suffocate you with their love. They’ll give you more than enough space to do your own thing and pursue your own interests.

6. Humblebrag Rights If they’re in Law School, they are basically geniuses (or well, the real world seems to think so). This means that by association you are thought to be intelligent. Just mentioning your SO will give you automatic credibility. I.e. “My boyfriend, who’s in law school (at UofT) said…” gives the impression that you’re right by virtue of the Law Student’s authority on whatever the topic is. Win-win.

7. Open Bars Law students attend many events…events with open bars…events where you can be their plus one. No further explanations, your honour.

8. They Hold Their Liquor A result of attending so many open bar events is they have a high tolerance for alcohol. You’ll never have to worry about you Law Student SO spewing their inner contents onto your expensive cocktail dress because they can hold their liquor.

9. You’ll Sound Cultured With all the old Latin terminology they use, you’re bound to pick up on it. You can then repeat it, it just makes you look oh so very

vs.

Professor Brenda Cossman

Meryl Streep

(image from johntreed.com)

(image from uc.utoronto.ca)

cultured and knowledgeable about worldly (albeit dead) languages. *No need to be concerned about actually knowing what the words mean, chances are no one outside of law school will even know/care.

10. Social Networking No, not Facebook, I mean, Law Students actually network, like in the real world. This means that when you need someone to do something for you, they’ll probably know a friend of a friend whose sister’s boyfriend from high school could do the job for you.

By the slim chance that they don’t know, it’ll take them about 0.24 seconds to network and find someone who can.

I could go on, but that would just be bragging or worse pitching a sale (and I’ve worked in a call-centre so trust me when I say it is the devil’s job). So take my advice, find yourself a Law Student (shouldn’t be too difficult, I mean who else reads this rag?) and avoid the eternally-lonesome-scorned-lover-VDAY-hater title.