Ultra Vires Vol 15 Issue 6: 2014 March

the independent student newspaper of the university of toronto faculty of law First Edition March 26, 2014 Vol. XV, No. VI ultravires.ca

Feature OneDelayed Feature Number Two Favourite Upper New Number Building Otasim nonet pedi doles as utaqu unt Until 2016 arum fuga. In conecus acea sape sen Announcement Follows Eight-Month ducil et rectus aut dolor.

Otasim nonet pediClass doles as utaqu unt Year arum fuga. In conecus acea sape sen Features, Page 6 ducil et rectus aut dolor.

News, Page 3

News, Page 5

Construction Delay News, Page 4

Feature WordNumber on theThree Street Otasim utaqu unt If younonet were pedi Deandoles for aasday, what arum fuga. conecus acea sape sen would youIndo? ducil et rectus Page aut dolor.

Opinions, 11

Features, Page 7

Feature Number FourNow? Where Are They A Look nonet at 3Ls’pedi Personal Otasim doles as utaqu unt arum fuga. In conecus sape sen Statements (Then) andacea Plans ducil et rectus aut dolor. for Articling (Now) Special Page 17 Features,Features, Page 9

Dean Moran Leaves Faculty of Law Surprise Announcement Comes Amid Big Changes to the Law School KENT KURAN (1L)

M

ayo Moran is leaving the deanship of the Faculty of Law to head Trinity College. Moran, who has been dean since taking on the position on January 1, 2006, succeeded Ron Daniels who oversaw the transformation of the law school into an elite, expensive, largely private institution. Moran will step down effective April 30, 2014, and will begin her role at Trinity on July 1, 2014.

“After more than two fantastic decades at our law school, it is hard to imagine being elsewhere.

I am very excited about taking on this wonderful new challenge but of course my feelings are also very mixed,” Moran stated in her announcement to the school on February 24, 2014.w The announcement came the just after Trinity’s highest governing body known as Corporation voted on her appointment.

Separated from the Faculty of Law by Philosopher’s Walk, formerly Taddle Creek, Trin—as it is commonly called—is a prestigious college whose history is deeply entwined with U of T’s own development. Among other things, Trinity also known for sending many of its graduates to the law school, which Moran sees as a happy coincidence.

The announcement came as a surprise to students and professors alike. Moran has oneand-a half years left in her second term. In an interview on March 19, 2014, Moran explained that she was asked about the new position in the fall of 2013, though she is frequently queried about jobs.

As Provost of the University of Trinity College, an old British title that refers to the master of a college, akin to the principals and presidents of the other integrated and federated colleges, Moran will continue to maintain ties to the law school. “I will still be doing research, but I won’t be teaching a big class. I’ll do some graduate student supervision. I have a few doctoral and graduate students so I’ll continue to do that.”

As for leaving early, she explained that, “In many ways I would have been happy to finish my term, take my two years of leave, because I really haven’t had leave since 2005 and then carry on.

But then it came along and looked interesting.”

Her time has seen many changes, along with a continuation of policies from Daniels’ time.

It was during Daniels’ term that an Ontario Progressive Conservative government deregulated professional school tuition, allowing the faculty to increase fees significantly. While at the start of her deanship Moran told students she would be moderate on tuition, the students at the law school saw increases at the legal maximum of 8%, and then 5% when the province lowered the cap.

“What I said, before the freeze came off was that I wouldn’t be aggressive on tuition and I wouldn’t be flat on tuition,” Moran explained.

“I would be modest on tuition. And I defined modest as somewhere between the rate of aca-

demic inflation and double digits. And academic inflation is about 5% and double digits is 10%, and 8 is somewhere between 5 and 10.”

Last year, students whose tuition fees surpass $30,000 per year organized a protest that saw two-thirds of the student body sign a petition to stop the increase in prices.

With a provincial election expected some time later this year, there is the possibility that tuition could be completely unregulated for “research-intensive” universities, as proposed by the Progressive Conservative opposition.

Moran said that while she would not speculate what the next dean would do, she stated, “I guess what I would say is that I did raise it by the legal amount, like every other law school in the province. We do that for a reason. It costs a lot of money to put on a great professional program. And at the same time we very carefully monitor accessibility, diversity, and financial aid. We do our best to bring in other money.”

As for accessibility, Moran admits that more can be more can be done to make the profession more open. “I think law has always been an elite profession. Law school was probably more elite when tuition was low here frankly. And we do a lot more than we used to do 20 years ago to try and make it more accessible.”

Moran is a proponent of the recent move that she brought in to incorporate the Back-end Debt Relief Program into the school’s financial aid system. The program would provide students with funds to repay their student loans based on their pay after graduation.

Her deanship also saw the multiple new initiatives, some of which are still in progress. She has overseen the introduction of a new grading scheme in 2012-2013, the initiation of construction of the law school expansion project in 20133014, and the implementation of a new first-year curriculum set to begin in 2014-2015.

“I guess whenever you leave, if you are trying to do things there are always going to be things that aren’t completely done. I felt that on the building project that getting the funding in place, getting the project underway, having good swing space for students, these were all things that really needed me.”

The new grading scheme moved from a standard A, B+, B, C+, C, F system to an HH, H, P, LP, F system, where the distributions are fixed and some grades are rarely given.

The rationale, as Moran explained, was that potential employers would look at Toronto Law students differently from other schools. “I just think that it’s good for firms to know that when they are looking at students that come from U of T, it really is a unique talent pool and they should judge that accordingly.”

“I would go to law firms and they would say, 'are we getting your best students?' And I’d say, 'All our students are fantastic. Our students are all great and you don’t need to be fixated on this.' ” As for the 1L curriculum, Moran sees the

changes as refocusing the program, as well as reducing the effects of what she called the “April First Year Phenomenon” for students by splitting the first year program into distinct semesters.

Moran also was key to raising funds—including the leading donation from Hal Jackman— for the school's expansion project. While the new law schools building complex will be larger, she does not foresee an increase in class sizes.

“I think the law school’s about the right size.

And I think it’s good to keep it at this size. I think it’s good for the students because you know each other better, you have better relationships with

your profs. I think it’s good for a whole range of reasons. It was designed with a student body of roughly this size.”

For her replacement, Moran gave some advice.

“Enjoy it. That’s it. It’s a great job. It’s a crazy job. There’s always a lot of stuff happening. At the same time, I honestly think that even on your worst days, it’s an amazing job to have. To be able to lead a place like this that has such a special role in the country, and try and think about what you can do to keep it going, to keep it flourishing, and how to make it better.”

EDITORIAL/NEWS

2 | MARCH 26, 2014

ultravires.ca

Thank You… and You… and You... and You… EMILY DEBONO (3L)

T

his year has brought a lot of change to our school. What we expected to be a year dominated by discussion of the “transition space” ended up being so much more: the year the building was delayed, the year the 1L curriculum was dramatically reformed, the year Bay Street hiring plummeted again, the year Dean Moran moved on to Trinity, and the year former Dean Daniels was awarded an honorary degree.

Despite everything, we remained engaged. Our community’s strength is both a result of and a testament to its adaptability, and I’m incredibly proud of any role that Ultra Vires has played in helping us make sense of these changes.

While trying to determine the social norms involved in writing end-of-tenure editorials, I revisited Patrick Hartford’s final editorial from last year. His title, “Our Best Issue Yet,”

resonates with me now more than ever before.

While I acknowledge that what I’m about to say is incredibly cliché, I’ll say it anyway.

Working on Ultra Vires has been so rewarding because, every time a new issue is complete, I really feel that this is the one... again and again, we’re producing our best issue yet.

You are the reason we’re able to keep improving. Thank you to everyone who has written this year. More than ever before, we’ve had a wide variety of contributors who have represented diverse perspectives on a whole host of issues. Thank you to everyone who has read and thoughtfully considered what our contributors and editors have worked hard to put together. You have all been essential in furthering UV’s effectiveness as an outlet for debate and a vehicle for progress.

If it came down to it, I’d pretty much have to thank every individual at or peripherally involved with U of T Law for making this year such a meaningful one, but there are a few people in particular I’d like to awkwardly single out.

Thank you Patrick Hartford—I’m sorry for bothering you every day about everything.

You have incredible vision and I’m grateful that you’ve been so willing to share it with me.

Thank you Alyssa Howes, our indefatigable layout editor, for your patience and skill. Even at the most stressful of times, working with you has been a pleasure. Thank you David Feldman, for your absolute devotion to the OCI survey and equally impressive commitment to making our covers into Photoshop masterpieces. And to every member of the Editorial Board, feel free to forward the sappy personal-

Breaking News N Tuition Expected to Go Up As Expected ENOCH GUIMOND (2L)

ext year's budget is working its way through the committees of the Governing Council, having gone from the Planning and Budget Committee to the Academic Board and to the Business Board, which has also set out a recommended tuition schedule for 2014-15.

The budget and the tuition schedule will go to the Executive Committee on March 27, 2014, and then on to the Governing Council for approval on April 8, 2014.

For JD students, the recommendation is to increase tuition by the maximum allowed by the Ontario government. That is 4% for JD students who started in 2012-13 or earlier, and

ized thank-you message you’ll soon receive to your entire contact list. I wish I had space to write everything here and give you the public recognition you each deserve, but there is too much to be said about you amazing people.

Finally, to next year’s Editors in Chief David Gruber and Paloma van Groll, I have every confidence that you will make UV into a smarter, sassier, funnier and more journalistically rigorous paper than the school has ever seen. Go forth and conquer!

5% for students starting after that. If this is approved, next year's 1Ls and 2Ls will both pay $30 230 in tuition, and 3Ls will pay $29 650.

The Governing Council is composed of 50 appointed or elected administrators, staff, professors, students, and alumni. From the Faculty of Law, Alexis Archbold and Edward Iacobucci currently sit as voting members of the Governing Council. No law student currently sits on the Governing Council, but Padraigin Murphy (1L) has been elected for the 2014-15 term. The details of the policies, procedures, and reports for the Governing Council and its boards and committees can be found at www.governingcouncil. utoronto.ca.

EDITORS WANTED! 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

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.

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.

UV is preparing to staff our Editorial Board for next year.

Being an editor entails pitching ideas at monthly editorial meetings, harassing people to write articles, and...mostly, just those two things. We’re looking to fill the following positions:

• News Editor • Opinions Editor • Features Editor • Special Features Editor • Diversions Editor If you’re interested in joining our editorial team, send us an email at ultra.vires@utoronto.ca by April 25, 2014.

Let us know why you want to join UV, and which position(s) you’re interested in.

We’re also looking for a photographer, and correspondents to cover particular beats. If you’re interested in becoming a regular contributor next year, get in touch!

If you want more information about what a particular position entails or anything else, don’t hesitate to ask.

NEWS

ultravires.ca

MARCH 26, 2014 | 3

U of T Law Hosts Former Detainee, Grassroots Activists, and Experts to Discuss Immigration Detention SOFIA IJAZ (3L)

D

eepan Budlakoti was born in Ottawa in 1989. His parents came to Canada from India a few years before his birth. They were employed by the Indian embassy in the capital city as domestic workers. Deepan has lived in Canada all his life; it is the only place he calls home. Despite this, the Canadian government has stripped him of his citizenship and is actively seeking to deport him to India—a country where he knows no one, and where he has never been.

India does not recognize him as their national, and has refused to issue him travel documents.

By the actions of the Canadian government, Deepan has been rendered stateless.

On March 18, 2014 a packed room of law students, community members, and practitioners heard Deepan tell his story. Although his case is troubling in unique ways, it is indicative of larger trends in Canadian immigration and refugee law towards criminalization, increased detention of migrants, and citizenship stripping.

To shed light on these trends, the Muslim Law Students Association partnered with the International Human Rights Program and the Asper Centre Refugee Law Working group to host a panel entitled “Crimmigration: Criminalization and Detention of Non-Citizens.”

In addition to Deepan, the panel featured U of T alum Barbara Jackman (a leading human rights and immigration lawyer), Stephanie Silverman (research associate at the Refugee Research Network), and Syed Hassan (a representative from No One is Illegal, a migrant justice group). Our own expert in the area, Professor Audrey Macklin, moderated.

“Crimmigration” is a term used in more re-

cent scholarship to refer to the interconnectedness between immigration and criminal law, and more specifically, to the increasing use of criminal law-like sanctions and discourse to “regulate” non-citizens. Silverman noted that the rise in immigration detention is one manifestation of “crimmigration.” Since 2004, 85 000 individuals have been detained in Canada.

Although courts have required that officials regularly review the detention orders, unlike in the US and UK, there is no cap on the length of detention in Canada. As of November 2013, 60 detainees have been held for over one year, awaiting deportation, including Michael Mvogo (detained for 7 years on immigration hold), and Victor Vinnetou (detained for 9 years).

Law enforcement officials can detain a noncitizen on a number of grounds, including if they believe that the individual is a threat to the public, is inadmissible to Canada, or is unlikely to appear for deportation. In addition, individuals can be detained if the government cannot confirm their identity. This is what has happened in Mvogo’s case: he arrived in Canada in 2005 on a fake US passport, and has been detained ever since because the government cannot confirm his real identity. Vinnetou also came using fake documentation in 1988. He has been held since 2004.

During the panel, Deepan talked about his own experience in immigration detention.

Around the same time that the Canadian government informed him that his passport was issued “in error,” Deepan was convicted of a firearms offence. Based on his prior convictions, he was deemed inadmissible to Canada, and was issued a

deportation order. After completing his criminal sentence, he was flipped onto immigration hold, and was sent to the Toronto West Detention Centre to await deportation to India. However, some months later, immigration officials concluded that he could be released (but on strict conditions) while he waits. Currently, he is fighting his deportation order in the Federal Court.

The re-detention and deportation of noncitizens convicted of criminal offences was described by the panel as a form of double-punishment. According to Barbara Jackman, “[i]f someone commits a criminal act or is engaged in criminal activity, Canada’s responsibility is to prosecute them, or if the offence occurred outside of Canada, to extradite the person to face prosecution somewhere else”. For non-citizens who are tried and convicted, Canada’s responsibility is not then to go on to deport them; the end of one form of detention (for criminality) should not simply mark the beginning of another (for immigration purposes).

Amongst other things, the panel showed how Deepan’s story captures the many ways in which Canada’s immigration and refugee law is regressing. As a stateless person, his case shows the increasing use of criminal sanctions in a non-criminal context; and as a person born and raised in Canada (with, at one point, a Canadian passport), his case shows the fragility and instability of citizenship itself.

The “Crimmigration” panel was organized

by Sofia Ijaz (3L), Dharsha Jegatheeswaran (2L), Luke Mc Rae (2L), Nabila Qureshi (2L), and Lisa Wilder (3L).

For more information about Deepan’s story, please visit www.justicefordeepan.org.

Bill Graham Talks Law and Foreign Policy with Students JORDAN BIRENBAUM (3L) AND LIN CONG (3L)

T

he Honourable William “Bill” Graham (’64) joined Professor Karen Knop’s new class.

“Foreign Affairs and the Canadian Constitution,” on Wednesday, January 29, 2014. A former law professor and statesman, Graham discussed the role of Canada’s constitution in the conduct of foreign affairs with students from the Faculty of Law and the Munk School of Global Affairs.

Graham has a storied history at the Faculty of Law. He was his graduating class’s Gold Medalist and he later returned to the Faculty to teach international law from 1980 to 1994.

During his years as a Member of Parliament, Graham was intimately involved in Canadian foreign policy. As a government backbencher, he served as a member, and then chair, of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Law. In January 2002, shortly after the attacks of

9/11 and invasion of Afghanistan, Graham was tapped to serve as the Liberal government's Foreign Minister. He served in this capacity under Prime Ministers Chretien and Martin, and in 2004 he became Minister of Defence. His time at Foreign Affairs coincided with the US-led invasion of Iraq and the controversies regarding detentions at Guantanamo Bay. After reminiscing about his university days, Graham began a frank discussion with students about constitutional and international law, based on his personal experience as a decision-maker during major Canadian foreign affairs events.

Graham explained that the practice of policy deliberation was drastically different from the theory and domestic application of law. When referring to Canada’s decisions surrounding military actions in Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq, he outlined the limits of the Constitution’s influence on actual decisions, and the uncer-

tainty of international law.

“International law is to law what Swiss cheese is to cheese; it is law, but full of holes,” Graham said.

Regarding legal constraints on Canadian foreign policy, Graham suggested that in his time the government had given considerable attention to international law, and relatively little consideration to constitutional or other domestic law. However, he indicated that considerations of all legal constraints in the conduct of Canadian foreign policy appreciated considerably during his tenure.

Graham was asked about the distinction between the legality of the Kosovo and Iraq wars—as Canada participated in the former and not the latter, though Kosovo was not initially sanctioned by the UN Security Council.

Graham stated frankly that, in the strict sense, the Kosovo War was initially “illegal”, however,

he contended that it was “legitimate.” He defended such “illegal” but “legitimate” actions by noting that such actions are occasionally necessary to advance positive changes in international law. He cited Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau’s decision—taken expressly in violation of international law—to enforce Canadian environmental laws in the Arctic beyond its territorial waters.

Concluding, Graham flagged the issue of technological advancements such as cyber warfare as particularly important for consideration by students and scholars. He was convinced that, because such matters were sufficiently new to foreign policy and constitutional law, they will likely radically transform the legal landscape of foreign policy-making.

NEWS/FEATURES

4 | MARCH 26, 2014

ultravires.ca

New Building Delayed Until 2016 Announcement Follows Eight-Month Construction Delay KENT KURAN (1L)

C

onstruction of the new Jackman Law Building has officially been delayed until February of 2016, according to the most recent Capital Report from the University of Toronto's Governing Council. Completion of the project will be “delayed by a minimum of 6 months due to withheld approval of the tree removal permit by the local Councillor,” according to the report.

The permits for the new building complex were approved at a Toronto City Council meeting on February 19, 2014. Construction was originally set to begin in June of 2013.

“We did have a delay around getting a city permit issued but the expectation is still to open in the 2015-2016 academic year,” said Scott Mabury, Vice President, University Operations.

“That is still our plan. The Business Board capital projects update does reflect the delay and while it mentions a 6 months delay, which would put us at February of 2016, it does not reflect the active discussions our project management team is having with the contractor to make up lost time.”

In an Orientation Week speech to the class of 2016, Dean Mayo Moran had indicated that the building would be open for the start of the 2015-2016 academic year.

According to the City of Toronto’s building permit status registry, many of the approvals were only sought in the late fall of 2013 and then rejected in the early winter of 2013.

“The effect of this delay on the budget is under review,” according to the Capital Re-

port. The building is largely funded by private donations, some university-wide funds, and building grants. It is currently estimated to cost $54 million, at about $258.04 per square foot. On February 20, 2014, Moran told Ultra Vires that the building was still on budget.

On March 19, 2014, Moran stated, “For sure it will affect the budget to some degree because we have to rent space for a longer period of time.”

Moran expects the law school will remain at Victoria College if necessary. The extra cost will have to be made up either through the law school budget, cutting costs to the building, or additional fundraising, Moran added.

Moran says she expects the class of 2016 will get to see the new building for part of their third year. According to the most recent

estimate, the building should be completed by midway through the Winter 2016 semester. By then Moran will have left the Faculty of Law for her new position at Trinity College. She says that she would leave it up to the students to decide if they want to move in to the new facility mid-term.

As for whether the timeline is realistic, the University Division of Planning, Design, and Construction has stated that the estimate is only a minimum. Neither Moran nor Mabury would give an estimate of the likely completion date.

Fashion File: Real Life STYLEZ Age appropriate clothing rules guaranteed to stop getting you carded EMILIE LAHAIE (3L)

A

s a contributor and former features editor of UV, I really wanted to submit something profound for this final UV edition of my career as a student at U of T law.

I’ve spent the last three years telling you where to get the cheapest bikini waxes, convincing you that YES, leggings are, in fact, pants, overshared about my personal life and raved about Scottish nightlife. However, I’m embarrassed to say I have yet to contribute any real piece of ground-breaking journalism to the Ultra Vires.

As I pondered how to adequately write about this next great adventure I am about to take, I received a text: “Dinner/Drinks with the crew?”

Eagerly I responded “OBVI… where!??!?” the response struck fear into my soul: “[insert Uber trendy King west establishment]”.

My first thought (after, “seriously could they just for ONCE pick somewhere with cheap beer?”), was, “wtf am I going to wear…” This may sound trite, but ladies and gentleman, this is a serious problem. The last time I had disposable income to spend on ‘going out clothes’ was approx. 3 years ago… right when I started law school as a early 20’s single-and-looking, dub-step loving WASC. A lot has changed since then… I no longer desire to show AS MUCH SKIN AS POSSIBLE when I got to the bar, crop tops have gone out of style, and I have less need for neon since I stopped going to the Hoxton to see over-priced DJs. Unfortunately, my wardrobe does not reflect this transition. I know how to dress for the office, but unfortunately I have no clue what 27 year olds wear.

HOW WILL I FUNCTION OUTSIDE THE IVORY TOWER???? UV (aka, moi) set out to investigate how to dress for life after law school, and here are the groundbreaking conclusions I came up with:

1

STOP SHOPPING AT ARITZIA. Its been my go to pre bar afternoon “wtf do I wear to tonight!?” stop since I was 18… and that’s a problem. When you find yourself wearing the same top as the 19 year-old beside you at the bar it may be time to retire that shirt.

Emilie at age 22 and today....wearing the SAME OUTFIT.

2

Sports-affiliated hats: You like the Jays? Greattttttttt, don’t care. We’re at a lounge, not playing slo-pitch at the park!

3

Shoes: Ladies: Just… learn to walk in high heels. It’s not that hard. If it hurts, pretend you're Coco Rocha, the sidewalk is the Dior runway and model apartment rent is three days late. Wandering home barefoot is just embarrassing, if you must, invest in a pair of fast flats. Gentleman: NO SNEAKERS. When I think sneakers and the bar I think of J-shore, and maybe I’m wrong, but that might not be the vibe you’re trying to give off.

4

You are not Forever 21… So take a cue from their very informative name and don’t wear it.

5

A slightly older and more fashionable friend advised me to just wear what I would to the office, but slut it up a little bit. Example: lose the jacket, undo a few more buttons and add a big statement necklace, VOILA! Ready for da club!

6 7

Popped collars, over it.

Nails, like your hair, are sometimes best kept within the spectrum given to us by nature. (And I admit, I type this with chipped teal nail polish). Seriously though, nothing screams “MILLENNIAL” like bright green nail polish.

8

Fit: everything looks better if it fits right.

There is a difference between “body con” and “too tight”, learn it.

9

Patrick, our lovely Editor-in-Chief Emeritus, when asked, offered “anything that makes you look different from anyone else… unique is bad.” I do not endorse this recommendation.

10

Best accessory: CONFIDENCE! Dude, you just graduated law school, BE PROUD of yourself!! It’s a proven fact that confidence erases at least 40% of clothing faux pas.

60% if Alcohol is involved!

And with that… Good-bye U of T, it’s been a slice. I know, I know, my incredibly relevant fashion advice that caters to the diverse needs of our faculty will be missed. But I’m confident J-Richards will have your style back next year! xxxx

NEWS/FEATURES

ultravires.ca

MARCH 26, 2014 | 5

Chief Justice McLachlin speaks at PBSC Appreciation Event MICHELLE HAYMAN (1L)

T

he University of Toronto and Osgoode Chapters of Pro Bono Students Canada came together for their volunteer appreciation event that is held each year at McCarthy Tetrault’s Toronto Office. This year, the event took place on March 13th and featured an extremely special guest: the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, Beverly McLachlin.

Although Dean Mayo Moran was called away from the event at the last minute, Osgoode Dean Lorne Sossin told the audience he would do his best to “channel Mayo” in order to introduce the Chief Justice. Dean Sossin then led a Fireside Chat with the Chief, effortlessly and humorously guiding the conversation through a range of topics, including a prediction of upcoming constitutional issues, changes in the Supreme Court during the past twenty-five years, and role models in the Chief Justice’s life and legal career.

When asked what Constitutional issues she believes will take centre stage over the coming decade, Justice McLachlin mentioned Can-

ada’s “reconciliation” with First Nations, describing the story of Canada more broadly as “a project on reconciliation”. She added that the Charter’s guarantee of Freedom of Association could be another area of activity, as well as the ongoing relationship between freedom of religion and equality, a pairing that often takes “new and diverse forms” because it is so central to our society.

When asked about advancements in gender equality she had witnessed during her time in the legal profession, she told a humourous anecdote about a conversation she had with an eighth grade teacher. After reviewing her personality test results, the teacher informed the future Chief Justice that she did not have the attention span required for a career as a telephone operator or a waitress.

The changing nature of technology was another recurring theme, with the Chief Justice covering a range of developments in this area, including the introduction of television cameras to Supreme Court hearings, then bloggers and

Tweeters, as well as public access to legal information online. Fittingly, at the close of the talk Dean Sossin took a “selfie” with the Chief Justice, to gales of laughter from the audience.

It would not have been a PBSC event without a discussion of access to justice and pro bono.

Here, Chief Justice McLachlin did not disappoint. She stressed the importance of pro bono work by law students and articling students, extolling it as “one of the best ways for people to learn”. As an articling student, she recalled that “pro bono files were some of the most exhilarating experiences I had”. She also described witnessing a cultural shift in the legal community over time, with “a greater emphasis…on the need for the profession to reach out to the community and provide services for people who might not be able to access [a lawyer]”.

Dean Sossin noted that Chief Justice McLachlin has herself taken leadership on the access to justice file, by striking a committee on civil and family justice, chaired by Supreme Court Justice Thomas Cromwell.

Dean Search 2014 The Advisory Committee MARITA ZOURAVLIOFF (2L)

W

ithin the next couple of weeks, President Gertler will announce his advisory committee roster, a group of individuals tasked with finding our next Dean.

We spoke to the University’s “Strategic Communications” office and some professors about the rather clandestine process.

Composition The Policy on Appointment of Academic Administrators (PAAA) briefly sketches out the appointment process. While a call for nominees to the committee is mandated by the PAAA, the President is given full discretion in filling the mandatory spots. A sample of the requirements listed in section 60 of the PAAA includes three to five

teaching staff, two or three ‘qualified scholars’, a librarian ‘where appropriate’, and a member of the ‘appropriate professional community’. The President can select between 10 and 18 members.

A faculty member interviewed pointed out that the composition of the committee can give a significant indication as to which direction the President would like the faculty to take. The new Dean will face financial challenges (such as the delayed building) as well as ideological ones: they will have to decide whether to continue to push forward with the aggressive tuition hikes touted by their predecessors, or to steer the school in a different direction. If the President chooses committee members that are of one mind with regards to certain key issues, then the

committee may be more likely to choose a Dean that also subscribes to those ideas.

The PAAA also allows the President to choose between one and three students for the committee. This year, the student body has urged the President to allow the maximum number of three and there is reason to be hopeful - in the 2005 and 2010 committees, there were 2 JD students and 1 graduate student. However, this is the first time that the student body has elected to put forward specific names.

The Dean Selection Process The membership of the committee is announced publicly, and a formal call for Dean nominations is circulated. It is at this point that the process be-

Although the Chief Justice noted that the work of the committee and the profession’s response to it has exceeded her expectations, she downplayed her own role by suggesting that she herself “didn’t actually do much”.

PBSC National Director Nikki Gershbain told the audience that she begged to differ. In her closing remarks, she said: “At the risk of disagreeing with the Chief Justice of Canada, I would observe that Chief Justice McLachlin has sparked a dialogue on access to justice that has reverberated throughout the profession…. I think it’s fair to say that the momentum we’ve seen over the last year or so, the collective desire by the profession to take concrete steps to repair the justice system in this country, is directly as a result of her commitment”.

To thank Justice McLachlin for her participation in the event, PBSC made a donation in her name to Lawyers Feed the Hungry, a program of the Law Society Foundation that provides hot, healthy community meals to street involved residents in Toronto, Ottawa, London and Windsor.

comes shrouded in secrecy. Advertisements are placed in newspapers, law publications and online platforms, but the list of nominees are never published, as that might “discourage potential excellent candidates that might be interested”.

In general, the committee will hold five to ten meetings, but it could be more. Committee members receive all applications and nominations, and can also suggest candidates themselves.

Sometimes an executive search firm is hired, but if the past is any indication an internal hire is more than likely (see chart, below). Once a shortlist is created, the Dean hopefuls will be called upon to make a presentation to the committee.

The short-list will not be made public either.

The committee decides on their candidate, and the President must also agree with the nomination. This nominee is then submitted to the Agenda Committee for approval, but this step is more of a rubber stamp.

When all is said and done, the process can take a year and during that time we will have an interim Dean at the helm. Professor Langille took on the task last time around, but there is no word yet as to who will step up to the plate.

Dean and Tenure

Roots and Expertise

Pre- Dean gig

Onward...

Next position held

...and Upward Later Career Highlights

Mayo Moran (2006-2013)

Born: Prince George, B.C. LLB (McGill); LLM (University of Michigan); SJD (U of T) Private Law, Comparative Constitutional, Legal Theory, Feminist Theory

U of T Law Associate Dean, 2000-2002

Provost of Trinity College

“Some people have very elaborate life plans where they’re like, “I’m going to get to X”. I’ve never lived my life like that. I’m going to pursue what I like to do and see where it takes me. And so, that’s what I’ve done so far. It seems to have more or less worked out in some rough sense. And that’s what I’m doing now.”

However, when asked what her dream job was, Dean Moran said Chef.

Ronald Joel Daniels (1995-2005)

Born: Toronto, Ontario JD (U of T); LLM (Yale) Economics, Public Policy, Corporate and Securities

U of T Law Professor, 1988-1999

Provost of the University of Pennsylvania

President of Johns Hopkins University

Robert Sharpe (1990-1995)

Born: Brantford, Ontario LLB (U of T); D. Phil (Oxford)

U of T Law Professor, 1976-1988

Justice, Ontario Superior Court

Justice, Ontario Court of Appeal

Robert Pritchard (1984-1990)

Born: London, England LLB (U of T); LLM (Yale)

U of T Law Professor, 1976-1984

President of the University of Toronto

Chair, Torys LLP Former Director, Torstar

Frank Iacobucci (1967-1979)

Born: Vancouver, B.C. LLB (UBC); LLM (Cambridge) Business and Tax Law

U of T Law Professor, 1967-

Vice President and Provost of the University of Toronto

Senior Counsel, Torys Justice, Supreme Court of Canada, 1991-2004 Interim President, University of Toronto 2004-2005 Member , Torstar Board of Directors

FEATURES

6 | MARCH 26, 2014

Favourite Upper Year Class Aboriginal Peoples and Canadian Law

ultravires.ca

Dear 1Ls. There will be a day, a glorious day, when you will be finished your exams and 1L will officially be over. That day is coming soon. After the feelings of (well-deserved) accomplishment subside, they will be replaced, over the summer, with feelings of panic, confusion and dread when you realize you have to pick your upper year courses. There are Course Requirements to fulfill (read: you have to take Bus Org), classes to take to “prove” to firms that you’re “serious” about “business,” and queries of whether or not to do DLS to ponder. Some will pour over the course list and craft their perfect schedule—only to be cockblocked by the lettering system. Others will forget that course selection is even occurring and yet somehow manage the perfect schedule anyway. However you go about it, nothing is more valuable than the advice of other students. We asked all the upper years what was their favourite upper year class.

We know you’re probably not worrying about this now—but trust us—this will come in handy soon.

Professor

Reason why you liked it

You should take this class if you like...

Student name & year

Kerry Wilkins

Wilkins is the bomb dot com. He not only is an engaging and clear lecturer on a very complicated area of law, but he also brings in at least one speaker on Indigenous law, one high profile speaker (like Ian Binnie), and makes a panel on careers in Aboriginal Law during the semester

You should take this class to learn about how the Canadian legal system interacts with Aboriginal peoples, and to understand some of the (many) problems with the legal policies surrounding Aboriginal peoples

Katherine Georgious, 3L

Prof is great, very enthusiastic. Course content is also really interesting—sort of real-world applications of torts (sports, health care, privacy, transmission of STIs, etc.) Led to lots of great discussion.

Torts? Also good professors and interesting topics.

Maddie Axelrod, 3L

Same reasons as above.

Practical applications of stuff you learned in first year (torts, legal process)

Lisa Wilder, 3L

I agree—this is the best class I've taken at the law school (Krista Nerland, 3L); plus one (Vicky Bae, 3L)

Advanced Torts

Alexi Wood

Canadian Income Tax

Jeffrey Shaffer

Great professor. The two hours fly by—he's extremely engaging and great at simplifying complex concepts for plebes like me.

The *world* would like this class.

Eryn Fanjoy, 2L

Civil Law

Catherine Valcke

Studying Quebec's civil law tradition not only sheds light on Canada's bijural legal heritage, but it also helps students better understand the common law (by using the civil law as a counterpoint). The course covers a wide variety of topics, and Professor Valcke does a fantastic job taking her students on the journey.

History, philosophy, legal methods, and politics.

Brendan Stevens, 3L

Class Actions Practice

Michael Eizenga

Eizenga is a very engaging speaker. He brings a unique perspective of having worked for both plaintiff and defendant class action firms. You learn very useful things about the practice of class actions from many guest lecturers who are leaders in this field. Assignments are also a very practical learning experience.

Class actions, product liability, securities litigation

Robert Sottile, 3L

Community Planning: Problems in Urban Policy & Land Use planning

Arnold Weinrib

This course is unstructured: we don't have a syllabus, a casebook or a final exam. Students are responsible for leading one seminar on topics that range from expropriation to zoning as well as submitting a paper on any topic of their choice. This year, the course was cross-listed with the UofT's Planning Program so folks currently completing their Master's brought a lot of knowledge and expertise to into the classroom.

I recommend taking this class if you are already at least minimally engaged with urban and land use policy.

Catherine Thomas, 2L

Contested Corporate Transactions

Patricia Koval

One of the few practical corporate law courses offered—gives you a great idea as Corporate law and want to be to how to advise clients in the context of mergers & acquisitions (both from tara corporate lawyer get and bidder perspective). Info is likely most useful for when you've advanced a bit in your career, but still great info to know if you want to practice corporate law

Sabrina, 4L

Corporate Transactions

Cameron Rusaw (Partner, Davies)

Practicality!

Corporate law and want to be a corporate lawyer

Carlie, 3L

Corporations, Individuals, and the State

Ian Lee

Prof. Lee has an uncanny ability to translate the gobbledygook students actually say in class into the much more coherent things they would have said if they were as smart as he is. This is a recipe for an unusually satisfying seminar.

Philosophy and politics at the intersection of corporate law and public law

David Feldman, 2L

Crime and Punishment

Nader Hasan

Great class discussion; great prof; and great topics to debate: things like 3 strike laws and the death penalty and mandatory minimums. Readings were manageable and on point. Overall, an amazing course!

Criminal law, comparative law, people who like to debate hot topic issues

Alana, 2L

DLS Clinic for Credit —Criminal Division

Karen Bellinger, Lisa Cirillo

Few courses have taught me so much about the way substantive law and procedure come together and function in "real" life. Concepts that I had learned two or three times in abstract finally "sunk in" once I had to navigate the criminal justice system for the benefit of a client. It was also taught me a great deal about the day-to-day aspects of legal practice that one doesn't often encounter until we start working. I feel so much more prepared for my upcoming work as a result of this course.

Criminal law, practical experience, working with clients, want to learn about procedure

Mallorie, 3L

This is the best experience I had at law school. I just wouldn't call DLS credit course as a "course"—it is very different and better in many ways, while being just as time-consuming if not more, than an academic course. One cannot study out of this one.

Vicky Bae, 3L

DLS Clinic for Credit—Refugee/ Immigration Division

Prasanna Balasundaram, Lisa Cirillo

Do you find the principles of natural justice absolutely titillating? Do you own a small locket with a picture of Madam Justice L'Heureux-Dubé? Is the Avengers your favourite comic-book movie adaptation? If so, I have a course for you... Nabila says, Justin this is serious stuff: We get to merge theory with practice in the realm of domestic and international human rights law while helping great clients. DLS is also just a fantastic community of amazing people and an atmosphere of open dialogue. Buuut we admit—the part-time clinic needs to be worth 9 credits. :)

Litigation, Human rights, international relations, political science, social justice

Nabila Qureshi, Justin Shoemaker, Beatrice Marry, Aryan Ziaie (all 2L)

DLS Clinic for Credit —Tenant Housing

Claire Hepburn, Lisa Cirillo

Faster and lighter than the other divisions, in tenant housing the files come to hearing and dissipate in a flash. At the same time, you are doing real legal work for real people who are often at a crisis point in their lives, facing eviction. And although the other divisions have other things going for them, they don't have Claire Hepburn who possesses wisdom and serenity beyond her years—just what a whobbly-kneed first-time litigator needs and (usually) is missing.

Litigation, legal practice, social justice, administrative law

John Koziar, 3L

DLS Clinic for Credit —University Affairs

Karen Bellinger, Lisa Cirillo

Take out your hatred of the university administration by defending cheaters against the Man. The advocacy experience in University Affairs is more like negotiation than a trial, with many informal hearings with emeritus professors. Also, and more seriously, save international students from the deportation that follows an expulsion or suspension. This division tends to be more entertaining than the others because, while the consequences can be serious, the charges involve things like printing entire text-books in miniature on the one page allowed cheat-sheet.

Litigation, hating the Man, talking to professors

John Koziar, 3L

FEATURES

ultravires.ca

Evidence

Evidence

MARCH 26, 2014 | 7

Professor

Reason why you liked it

You should take this class if you like...

Student name & year

Stewart

Clear, concise, brilliant.

Criminal Law/ Litigation

Farhad Shekib, 2L

Shaffer

We second this—Prof. Stewart is incredibly knowledgeable, a great lecturer and he is very accessible to students outside class. I'm really enjoying learning about this complex area of the law.

Natalie Lum-Tai (2L), Andrew Hotke (2L)

Stewart is such a great professor. He offers a great balance between an academicoriented approach and a practical one. He should never stop teaching this course!

Yale Hertzman, 2L

Dat shaffer bicep. Seriously, she makes a very complicated area of the law very easy to understand. I don't think I have ever had a better lecturer.

Litigation. much of it is about balancing the adversarial process.

Danny Urquhart, 2L I second this— Evidence with Martha Shaffer is proven BRD to be the best course.

—Nadia Zaman, 2L

She is amazing, makes a confusing area of law both engaging and digestable.

Enough said.

Litigation—you really get an idea of how a trial works. Even though it mostly focuses on criminal law, if you understand criminal evidence, civil litigation or admin tribunals will just use a watered down version.

Drew Beesley, 2L

Aside from being a perfect woman/human, she makes evidence easy to follow, engaging, and exciting. Also really great to just chat with about life.

TV law e.g. Law & Order

Elizabeth Kagedan, 2L

Martha Shaffer is clear, concise and insightful. You'll emerge with a comprehensive understanding of evidence law - and the readings are not too heavy.

Criminal law, litigation.

Ashvin Singh, 3L

Shaffer is a fantastic communicator. Her lectures are very well organized. On cloudy days her lectures make the day brighter. On sunny days she lets us out early. She tees off each segment of her lectures with headings and sub-headings. Only "con" I can think of is how she wants us to only bring in a one-page map for the exam, but that is manageable.

Witnessing an example of an amazing person two times a week; criminal law

Bobby Leung, 3L

She is an amazing human being. Incredible person. Just amazing.

Farhad Shekib, 2L

Financial Crimes and Corporate Compliance

Ken Jull

Great course that touches upon nearly every possible aspect of corporate governance and white-collar crime from both theoretical and practical angles. Jull is a very good lecturer and brings in many different illustrious and infamous guests every week.

...Corporate governance, securities law, regulatory theory, and even criminal law.

Or if you would like to meet a bunch of high-profile lawyers with expertise in these areas.

Deniz H. Oktem, 3L

Franchise and Distribution Law

Ship

This course is really practical and taught with great clarity. You leave each lecture with a good sense of how franchise law is applied. Ship is a fantastic lecturer and is very approachable.

Business, Contract Law

Mike Cork, 2L

International Criminal Law

Andrea Russell

Discussions are incredibly interesting, and concepts are framed to be manageable to those new to the subject area but still incredibly engaging, A lot of information about the dynamics of world events that I would not have otherwise been able to grasp, readings are reasonable

To learn about recent world events

Mayleah Quenneville, 2L

International Human Rights Law

Jennifer Orange

The course is fun, discussions are engaging, and readings are manageable.

International Law, Human Rights, Philosophy, Political Science

Omid Mousavi, 2L

International Tax

Robert Raizenne, Scott Wilkie

The concepts are super easy to understand. The lectures are slack and great for getting through The Economist (the online edition comes out on the same day).

The dynamic between the two great International Tax thinkers is interesting—like Frasier and Niles.

Not reading cases as International Tax has no cases to read.

Read the textbook, which is very clearly written, and you're done. I get the feeling that any of the other courses with "International" in its title has little substance, so you might as well take this course to fill up the ICT requirement.

Anonymous Tax Coward

Labour Law

Brian Langille

I disagree that "he dynamic between the two great International Tax thinkers is interesting". It is rather painful IMO. Otherwise, all mad truths

Another anonymous student

Great time to read The Economist

You guessed it— yet another anonymous student

Professor Langille is able to effectively teach the basics of the Labour Relations Act while also challenging you to think about the "big ideas" in labour law and where the field is heading.

... Social justice and workers' rights... Or if you think you might have employees one day.

Josh Mandryk, 3L

Brian Langille is THE best.

If you want to learn about the most awesome area of law with a professor that really challenges you to think about the basis for the system of law

Kirsty Collins, 2L

Law and Multiculturalism

Ayelet Shachar

Shachar is an incredibly well-respected and brilliant scholar in the field of citizenship and immigration law. And as a bonus, she's so kind

Thinking about issues related to multicultural accommodation, the balance of group vs. individual rights, and how we can think about minorities, the majority, and the often forgotten minority within a minority

Katherine Georgious, 3L

Law and Policy of Biotechnology

Richard Owens

It was really fun. We had small group discussions about the legal issues surrounding really interesting biotech topics like human cloning and genetically modified foods. Always a really good debate. Also, Richard Owens is an amazing instructor.

...Discussing controversial issues and cool science stuff.

Stefanie Oliveri, 3L; Teresa MacLean, 3L

FEATURES

8 | MARCH 26, 2014

Media & Defamation Law

Professor

Reason why you liked it

You should take this class if you like...

Student name & year

Paul Schabas & Bert Bruser

Excellent discussion. The two practitioners have a wellspring of experience and knowledge of the subject matter. They have been counsel on some of the biggest cases in Canadian defamation law (i.e. Grant v. Torstar). Not overly legal, more of a journalism ethics type of class.

Readings are very interesting. Workload is moderate and manageable.

Hearing how a newsroom handles potentially defamatory stories; Discussing Rob Ford's legal issues;

Anonymous (2L)

The Bert and Paul bromance is one of the best things about this entire law school. They’re counsel to the Toronto Star and have been involved on some of the most interesting and important litigation files in the country. This course is by far the best course I ever took at law school.

It’s practical, but at the same time incredibly intellectually engaging. It’s taught by two of the most influential lawyers in this entire area of law.

They’re two of the smartest, nicest, humble professors I’ve ever had. A decent amount of readings, but they’re actually really fun. Class discussion is engaging. Cannot recommend highly enough.

… Knowing how to avoid being sued for defamation; you’re a news/media junkie.

Anonymous (4L)

Workload is manageable (even kinda fun, if you think that's possible in Law school). The practitioners who teach it are excellent and currently practicing in this area. They come into each class able to discuss what is going on today in the news. Amazing guests in the class, the discussion is always interesting.

Torts, the news (obvi), Finding out how the "backend" of the news works

Emilie Lahaie, 3L

Negotiation

Jacobs

Restitution

Ernest Weinrib

Securities Law

ultravires.ca

Anita Anand

Ben Iscoe, 3L Readings are manageable. Great discussions. Engaging teaching style.

Anyone interested in deeper questions of justice, beyond the mass of case law covered in 1L. Anyone who is interested in the recent emergence/recognition of unjust enrichment as a distinct head of liability. This course is a good entry point to theories of corrective justice, as a counterpoint to pervasive American legal realism and its progeny.

U of T is unique for being an academic centre for this perspective.

Jonathan Cheng, 3L

Reading are very manageable; Enrie Wienrib is very funny and engaging, and makes the theory highly accessible. Learning about unjust enrichment as a distinct head of liability also helped me understand much more about torts and contract law (and served as a refresher of all that tort and contract law I had forgotten since first year). Overall, I came away from this class feeling like I had a much firmer grasp not just of unjust enrichment but private law liability in general.

Anyone interested in private law generally. Anyone who has wondered what "unjust enrichment" means, or would like a better understanding of trust law. Anyone interested in practicing family law who has never quite understood what the Supreme Court is doing with the domestic constructive trust, and has wondered if it in fact makes any sense at all.

Laura Cardiff, 3L

Anita kills it. Makes this complicated course much simpler for the pezs.

Exam wasn't great but deal with it. You don't really need to do the readings b/c she is so good.

Less reading and you can still learn a Andrew Chan 2L lot. Just study for a bit before the exam.

Dan Everall,

I concur. Anita is da bomb.

3L

Sports Law

David Goldstein & Gordon Kirke

Sports law is the most interesting kind of law. And to echo Dave Kumagai, the two practitioners are a "wellspring" of experience and knowledge

Sports.

Max Mandel, 2L +2 (Eryn Fanjoy, Lauren Harper)

Trial Advocacy

Group of practitioners

Great hands-on experience and practical feedback, weekly assignments are interesting but not too much work, and the final trial is way more fun than an exam. Bonus: the whole course is over before exam period even starts.

Anyone interested in litigation— civil or criminal

Katherine McNeill, 2L

I second this and would add that it's a great class for anyone remotely curious about litigation—it's a great chance to get a sense of litigation!

Youth Criminal Justice

Emma Rhodes & Brock Jones

Brenna Staats, 2L

Great course with practical application. I have used these skills in DLS. Weekly assignments take some time, but well worth it. Good feedback throughout from practitioners. Final trial takes place in Superior Court before a real judge (and you get to invite family and friends as the jury members).

Litigation

Daniel Klein, 3L

So much fun and easily the most directly applicable course I took in law school. It was also a nice side benefit to be completely done with the course in late November!

Litigation

Megan Andrews, 3L

Very practical. Appreciated the feedback from weekly assignments.

Sometimes it's tough to know the expectations for some of the assignments but it makes sense afterwards. Our "small group" practitioners made the evening workshop accessible and fun. Getting to do a mock trial for the final evaluation in a real court room with a real judge was also incredibly enriching.

Trial litigation

Bobby Leung, 3L

Great, clear overview of the (very complicated) YCJA and youth justice more generally. Taught by one Crown and one Defence counsel so experiences from both sides are drawn out on every topic. Excellent practical examples given to illustrate issues. Profs have several guest speakers come in throughout the term, including judges. Profs set up (totally voluntary) opportunities to engage in mock exercises in front of real judges. Very approachable profs who are committed to helping students succeed.

Criminal law, trial litigation

Alex Penny, 2L

Seconded!— Joel Smith 3L

ultravires.ca

FEATURES/OPINIONS

MARCH 26, 2014 | 9

This is How You Do It The 1L Recruit MICHAEL GARBUZ (1L)

H

aving had some time to reflect upon the 1L recruitment, here are some thoughts, opinions, and suggestions about how to be successful in the process.

1

Get Good Grades. It is commonly stated that marks are very important for the 1L recruit, probably even more than in the 2L OCI process. There are fewer positions available in first year, and many firms use first semester grades as a significant component in determining the strength of an application. Some firms (from anecdotal evidence) will only interview people with the very top grades in the class, having less regard to the overall strength of an application. So with that in mind, how does an incoming law student get good grades? Some things that I found to be helpful were: • Go to class (every class). Professors test mainly on what they talk about in class. You need to go to class to learn what the professor is emphasizing in each case and in the course as a whole.

• Do readings before class. This helps you understand what the professor is discussing and allows you to get the most out of class.

This is also a really good way of keeping on top of material, and not falling behind, because it keeps you fairly regimented.

• Do 0L prep. What is 0L prep? I had no idea this existed until reading online and speaking

with upper years. It is essentially doing work before law school starts. It is definitely not required to be successful at law school, but it might be helpful to you. Some strategies for 0L work include reading books about law school (for example, Getting to Maybe), talking to older students about strategies and even getting notes from upper-years. Once you start in September things move really quickly—so anything you can do before school starts might be helpful in the long-run.

• Start studying and reviewing early. Start reviewing your notes early. Begin making maps early. Everyone is going to be studying hard in December. Less people are studying hard in November or October.

• Be resourceful. Upper-years at school are tremendously helpful and awesome people. Speak to mentors and students who just went through 1L, because they have a wealth of knowledge and expertise, and they are also eager to help.

Chances are someone helped them in the past.

Ask for help and I bet you will be surprised how willing and generous people can be.

There are a multitude of other tips that you can find about getting good grades. Here are some tips about exam writing from some exam info sessions I found to be helpful: • Spot as many issues on exams as you can.

• For difficult issues you should speak a lot about both sides—spend a lot of time on these questions.

• Embrace ambiguity—use policy, momentum of decisions, and what the court is trying to achieve.

• Have good structure. Look to score points.

Use powerful headings.

• Try to resonate with the professor Discuss interesting issues.

Marks are also not everything in the 1L process.

These are some other tips I found to be helpful:

I would love to meet them.” You don’t need to embellish your past, just highlight a few key interesting experiences that will be transferable to a law firm environment (get creative!) and always come across in a mature and professional manner. Having colleagues proofread your materials and give you insight about what they like and don’t like will help improve the quality of your application (I also suggest getting these materials done over the winter break in 1L because the second semester can be quite hectic).

2

4

Meet People: Take advantage of the opportunities you have to meet people. People generally hire people that they like and that they trust. Make an effort to go on firm tours, use networking opportunities, and firm events. Work on establishing relationships and connections.

Follow-up with people. This will help in getting interviews and being successful at them. It will also allow you to meet a ton of interesting people.

3

Produce strong application materials.

Employers get tons of resumes and cover letters, so make sure that yours are up-to-par.

Make sure there are no simple mistakes (grammar, spelling, dates, etc). Regarding cover letters, one of the best pieces of advice I got was that you want employers to read your cover letter and say “That person sounds really interesting and

Interview well. Many full articles have been written regarding interviews, so I will just outline a few interesting things I found to be helpful: • Speaking to lawyers at the firm before interviewing • Speaking to students who have summered at the firm before interviewing • A sking good questions at appropriate times • Smiling • Not being too rehearsed • Showing interest in the firm • Following up with emails to people that you meet • Being yourself • Meeting as many people at the firms as you can during interviews • Using the CDO for every step of the application and interviewing processes

Stop Right Now, Thank You Very Much ANONYMOUS

I

would like to begin by clarifying why I am writing this article. I am not writing this article to discredit the hard work that has been done by dedicated students over the past several years on the subject of questioning increasing tuition. I am not writing this article in defence of the administration. I am not even writing this article to shill for any particular position on the tuition issue.

No—I am writing this article simply because I feel that the past several years at the Faculty of Law have been absolutely dominated by overly negative rhetoric surrounding the tuition issue.

Even the once smutty rag upon which these words are printed has become flooded with a plethora of articles, charts, and “ jokes” about how much we pay to attend this fine institution (I appreciate the irony as I write this article).

Through all of this—the exposés, the town halls, and the walls covered in multi-coloured complaints—the student message remains adversarial, rather than constructive.

The dichotomy is clear: all students are completely disgusted with the current levels of tuition and any proposed increases, while all faculty members are entirely ignorant to the needs of the student body and are happy to watch us squirm under high levels of debt so long as their pocketbooks are padded. From an outsider’s perspective, it would seem that there is a civil war of attrition being waged at the Faculty of Law.

However, there is a large (and largely quiet) group of law students that fall somewhere in the middle of the tuition issue. You would be hard-pressed to find a law student who doesn’t agree that tuition is high. Yes, $30,000 is a large number. Still, some students actually agree with the faculty’s stance on the tuition issues. Many contend that high tuition is something that came along with their accepting a position at U of T Law. And most would agree that the tuition debate has become an often aggressive and overwhelming force that has come to dominate student consciousness.

To be clear, I am fully in favour of a productive dialogue on the issue of tuition. No matter what, tuition and tuition increases will be a central concern for most students at any institution.

We are consumers of education and we want to know what we pay for and to make informed decisions based on that knowledge. Nevertheless, I truly believe that the current discourse does more harm than good. Rather than work with elected student representatives and the faculty to create solutions to tuition woes, many students have chosen to focus instead on enforcing a culture of unproductive criticism of the administration. These students have effectively alienated a great many students who want change, but who do not wish to take such a divisive stance on the issue.

The fact that I am currently writing this anonymously is a prime example of the hostile

tone this debate often takes. I am no stranger to criticism. In fact, many have called me a “lightning rod” (though this may be due to my uncanny ability to conduct electrical current and protect structures from lightning strikes).

Still, on this issue, I feel as if I would be personally attacked for airing my grievances. I am afraid that the focus would turn to my family background, my career ambitions, or my personal net worth, and that these factors would be thrown back at me to discount my opinion.

I see such attacks happening every day—less often in the form of outright character assaults and more prevalent through passive aggressive comments and “ jokes.”

We make these “jokes” every day. We made them at Follies, we make them every month in this paper. Jokes about how long it will take us to pay off our debt; jokes about how poor we will be because of our degree from U of T; and jokes about how we are being forced to go become a corporate cog on Bay Street simply because we have to pay the bills. I don’t find these jokes funny and I don’t find them helpful. They won’t help me make a loan repayment schedule and stick to it. They don’t make me feel any better about how much debt I have; in fact, they serve as a cruel reminder. And they certainly don’t help me to enjoy my time at this institution while I’m here.

Earlier this semester, a campaign to have students memorialize their “tuition grievances” took place outside Birge reading room. Every

day, I walked by a wall where students wrote about the staggering stress of debt load, and being forced to take a job they hate to pay it off.

This was an example of aggressive politics. It was meant to make the administration take notice—I understand that much. But it also made me feel uncomfortable and unwelcome in my own school. It was a visual manifestation of the combative tone into which this debate has degenerated: look what you’ve done to us, watch us paste your failings all over your school. Am I somehow not part of the U of T student community because I do not feel the need to go to war with the administration?

The question of value is subjective. Is my education at U of T worth X amount of dollars more than an education at Dalhousie, or Western, or UBC? That is a personal choice. It is a choice that I made when I decided to accept my offer from U of T Law. I saw the value of a degree from this institution. If I could have paid less for the value I imputed to this education, I would have. We need to have a productive debate about how we can make U of T more accessible in the years to come. But I think, most of all, we need to remember that the key word is productive, and stop pretending that we are not part of the problem.

OPINIONS

10 | MARCH 26, 2014

ultravires.ca

3L Words of Wisdom “Stay connected to friends you make in 1L. It's easier to stay connected in 1L because you see everyone everyday for mostly the same classes. But in upper years, people are all over the place, and it's harder to keep in touch.

“The best way to avoid 3Litis is to stay involved: help out at a club, a journal, an advocacy project, a clinic, at a law office, or a charitable organization inside or outside of the legal community. Oddly, being more involved is energizing— the more you do, the more you'll find you CAN do.”

“The less time you spend pretending you're going to avoid Bay Street, the more painless your transformation will be.”

“Words of wisdom: live every free pizza lunch as if it's your last.”

“Get involved—the law school is probably your last best opportunity to be involved in such a great community”

“Do all your readings, make your own maps, and never go to pub night. It’s time to grow up.”

[Ed note: this submission was from a noted 3L troll]

“You shouldn’t worry about taking on too much because being busy forces you to manage your time more efficiently. Get involved!”

“Enjoy wearing yoga and sweat pants while you can.

You will only be a student for a limited time and you will one day dream of being able to wear them on a daily basis.”

“The best lawyers are not always the best law students.

I.E. YOUR MARKS DON'T MATTER. For serious.

STOP WORRYING ABOUT THEM. I got plenty of OCIs and a sweet job being, as one prof put it, "a solidly B student". What really matters is being a confident, well-adjusted human being. Not only when applying for jobs, but also, for like, you know, life in general.”

“You can get a cheap therapist through The Living Institute (Google it). DO IT. 40 dolla a week to cry about my #3Lproblems? Priceless.”

“Take advantage of the fact that you have time and flexibility “Don’t let a few negative experiences taint your view of law school as a whole. Your classmates are really as a student. If you think something is interesting and great people and this is an opportunity to make worthwhile, do it! Sure we have a lot of work, but don’t let wonderful memories and lifelong friendships.” that be your excuse not to engage in the unique opportunities that we have as students”

"Let me know what the new building looks like in 6 years" “Stinkies’ Ultimate Post-Pub Night Canton Chili Ordering Guide: • Hot & Sour Soup • General Tsao Chicken • Crispy Ginger Beef • Deep Fried Spicy Tofu • Green Beans in Black Bean Sauce • Veggie Fried Rice • Baby Bok Choy (and we don’t care) Learn it, love it, and always say hi to Sam. We’ll miss you UofT!”

“Use the upper year program, and in particular your final year, to become deeply immersed in what you are passionate about at the law school. The curricular and extracurricular opportunities available to upper year students can be tremendously rewarding if you seek them out!”

“It's all so bittersweet. I can't stand the thought of this being done and I also think I might die if life was full of never-ending law school.”

“Do less.

It's just law school.

Chill out!”

“This too shall pass.”

"You can cram for an exam. You cannot cram for the mirror. Stay healthy. Go to the gym, eat properly and get 7-9 hours of sleep per night.

If this means you miss a few pages of reading, so be it. Also, if you smoke, quit smoking."

“Go to as many of the special events as possible, like Law Ball and Follies, etc.

It might not seem like a big deal at the time you decide to miss the event, but they are one in a lifetime events and it helps mold the law school experience.”

(1) Enjoy your time here—it goes by quickly; and (2) You knew what tuition was when you accepted your offer of admission, between your complaining about it, make sure you have some fun

OPINIONS

ultravires.ca

MARCH 26, 2014 | 11

Word on the Street COMPILED BY: ALANNA TEVEL (2L) AND PALOMA VAN GROLL (2L)

If you were Dean for a day, what would you do?

“Free Coffee”—Laura McGee (3L) (pictured), Tom Wagner (3L), and Marita Zouravlioff (2L)

“Have Daniel Everall immediately expelled from the school” —Marin Leci (3L)

“Weekly Muffin Madness” —Lauren Grossman (2L)

“Hogwarts moving stairs” —Tom Wagner (3L)

“I would pour myself a stiff drink” —Alex Ognibene (1L)

“Make pub night an open bar.

I’d also put TVs for sports in the lounge. And video games. Yeah!”

—Andrew Chan (2L)

“Go away”—Andi Jin (3L)

“Chocolate chip muffins during Muffin Madness. Why is it even called Muffin Madness? There are never any muffins.”

—Shaanzeh Ataullahjan (1L)

“Make U of T Law a two-year program”—Spencer Burger (1L)

“Make tuition free” —Samantha Eisen (1L)

OPINIONS

12 | MARCH 26, 2014

ultravires.ca

(Not so) Reasonable Accommodation DANIEL CARENS-NEDELSKY (1L)

I

recently looked into our policies on late papers and extensions, and found them to be quite harsh and restrictive.

Papers lose 0.6 of a letter mark for the first day late, and 0.2 for each subsequent day (each day of the weekend counts, but you can email your paper in to the records office). Extensions are only granted in cases of “serious illness or compelling personal circumstances.” Further, “Written documentation (i.e. a doctor's note) is required in all circumstances.”

I can’t say I was exactly surprised, as I feel these policies are reflective of broader trends about how our law schools approaches health and wellness, as well as diversity. Still, I do find them galling, especially given how relatively easy it is to change them compared with other issues (e.g. tuition).

In order to criticize them, I think it’s important to first lay out why I think schools have accommodation policies in the first place. I think it's fairly uncontroversial to say that goal of such policies is to ensure everyone has an equal opportunity to succeed. In order create this level playing field, these policies work on the well-established principle that equality doesn’t always mean treating everyone the same. Obviously our policies follow this principle to some extent, but I believe they fail at truly embracing it.

There are many situations our policies likely do not cover. Do you think a parent’s child getting sick with a cold would constitute a “compelling personal circumstance”? What about a child who comes home crying because she was bullied and needs time and attention that her

parent had earmarked for finishing a paper?

What happens to the students struggling with mental illness who feel that they aren’t able to get doctors note? What about students whose friends, family, or loved ones are facing mental illness? Not accommodating such situations ignores the fact that students' health and wellbeing is significantly affected by their relationships with other people.

Even if these situations are covered, the requirements for written documentation are incredibly intrusive. Do we really want to require a student to bring in medical evidence that his partner suffers from depression and happened to need his attention more than his law school paper did? Demanding such documentation shows a blatant lack of concern for students' privacy. Further, it ignores the fact that groups that face the greatest barriers to law school are also the same groups that are much less likely to have access and/or desire to attend medical or mental health institutions. By requiring that students’ concerns are validated by institutions that in many cases continue to play a significant role in discriminating against them, U of T helps to erase the realities of these students’ lives and require that they ignore the very differences that we theoretically celebrate.

Given these concerns, one wonders why we would want to limit the circumstances in which students are granted extensions. The most obvious explanation is the concern that students who are granted an extension receive an advantage over students who are not. As we are graded on a strict curve, this advantage

would then clearly come at an unfair cost to other students. I find this argument unpersuasive. Law students, especially first year students, are extraordinarily busy. Extra time to work on a small group paper comes at the expenses of time that could spent doing readings or preparing for exams. The principle advantage that an extension gives is not in allowing students to write a better paper than they otherwise would, it is in giving them a small breathing space to manage their affairs when unexpected disruptions enter their life. 72 hours can be the difference between full blown panic and manageable stress, between an allnighter and a healthy amount of sleep, between a paper the student ends up hating and a one that she is proud to hand in.

Nor can it be argued our policies are about encouraging responsibility. A report from the curriculum committee acknowledges that first year students spend an average of 50 hours a week on law school, not including extra curriculars, assignments, or exam preparation. Given such a crowded schedule, a restrictive extension policy doesn’t encourage careful time management, it encourages dedication to law school above all other concerns. This comes across pretty clearly in the policies for what happens if an extension is granted: “it is expected that students will, during the period of the extension, be fully engaged in the completion of the paper and set aside all other commitments with the exception of preparing for and attending classes.” What about those compelling circumstances that got you an extension in the

first place? U of T seems to say that as much possible you should ignore them.

I distinctly remember a mandatory ethics seminars telling students to own up to their supervisors at work when they think they won’t be able to meet a deadline and still complete a task with the care it deserves. Yet we have a triple punishment for the first day late, clearly pressuring students to pull an all-nighter rather than suffer a serious hit to their grades. Obviously we will face deadlines at work that simply cannot be changed, but I would argue we represent such situations already with exams, a situation where I do think serious concerns over fairness and practicality justify strict restrictions on accommodation requests.

U of T talks a good game of being concerned about student health and wellness, but when push comes to shove it’s clear we take our cues from what we perceive to be the industry standard. We have substantially altered our admission criteria in the hopes in increasing the diversity of students that we attract, but once we get them here we practice a “one size fits all” approach towards accommodating them.

I have no problems with our smoothies and puppies, but I’d rather U of T start with ensuring its students privacy and autonomy, and go from there. For now, it’s pretty clear U of T cares more about superficial solutions than meaningful impact.

Why John Tory will (and should) be the next mayor of Toronto LAURA MCGEE (3L)

I

’ve served as President of the University of Toronto Law and Politics Club for the past three years. In this role, I’ve attended speaker’s events with senior cabinet ministers, former Premiers, and members of provincial and federal parliament. The best part by far is the Q&A, where politicians show their mettle under fire by a roomful of law students. Some are awkward and unprepared. Others are sharp and quick witted. In my view, none showed themselves to be as competent and ready to lead as John Tory.

If Tory can survive the political firestorm to come, he will be the next mayor of Toronto. I say this with certainty for three reasons.

1

He’s smart. Not just intelligent, and not merely educated. Tory has people skills and a sixth sense about the city. He knows Toronto inside and out and can speak about issues that candidates (and residents) ignore.

When there is no easy solution, Tory thinks of a creative one.

One example is Regent Park and the need for affordable housing in Toronto. The people of Toronto care about the community, but can’t afford to pay more taxes. Rather than dodge the issue, Tory has a solution: public-private partnerships. Another example is subsidized health care for seniors. This could be the most important economic issue for our generation.

Yet Tory is one of few with the guts to put it on the table.

2

He’s experienced. Contrary to what Doug Ford might say, Tory does have a record, and it is damn impressive. He’s proven that he can make a success out of a struggling corporation (Rogers Cable), a sports league (the Canadian Football League), a community group (CivicAction), and a law firm (Torys LLP). He has done a better job with each project he’s

taken on. This track record bodes well for the future of Toronto with Tory at the helm.

The secret to Tory’s success is simple. He doesn’t just solve problems—he anticipates them. Take the Gardiner Expressway, which is quite literally falling apart. Tory makes the obvious (but politically unpopular) point that the Gardiner is due for a major capital investment.

This kind of business acumen is crucial in the leader of Canada’s largest city.

3

He has integrity. I’m not one to care much about what politicians do in their private lives. But there is an obvious benefit to having a mayor with a clean record: we can rest assured that he won’t be the target of blackmail.

Beyond this, Tory has shown himself to be a man of principal. A good friend of mine spent time working across the table from Tory at Queen’s Park. One of his favourite anecdotes from his time in politics involves Tory

reaching out across party lines. They worked together on an obscure social issue that was extremely important to a very few people, many of whom weren’t eligible to vote. Politically, Tory had nothing to gain. He chose to make an impact for no reason other than he believed in the issue.

There is no doubt the mayoral race will get messy. The Fords have attacked Tory like a pitbull backed against a wall: they have met their match and they know it. The bottom line is that Torontonians are smart, capable, and well aware of what makes a good leader. If the marketplace of ideas works as it should, we’re on our way to a Tory victory this October.

OPINIONS

ultravires.ca

MARCH 26, 2014 | 13

Contempt of Course The business of law school is school DAVID GRUBER (2L)

T

he thrashing of our institution began almost by accident. Following a turbulent period under the leadership of Bob Rae, Ontario swung to the right, as if for spite, and elected a comically reactionary government that promptly deregulated professional school tuition. Ron Daniels—the deregulation dean—boasted about the “price of excellence”, claiming his ambition was to transform U of T on the model of private American law schools.

But all we copied from them was the price, with the excellence yet to come.

The real ambition, you see, is not an excellent school but an excellent business. The institution is now concerned more with generating revenue than with disseminating education. The promise of excellence was just the sales pitch.

In this distorted approach, professional schools (and soon all schools) adopt all the worst behaviour of private businesses: treating students like customers to be swindled, professors as executives to be pampered, and degrees as products to be dispensed at the highest possible price. I call this the worst of business' behaviour because there's plenty about the mercantile style that wouldn't harm education and may even improve it. But that's not how it works, now is it?

Today, overrated politicians with faces like Lego-men talk grandly about running government like it's a business. A similar toxic dog-

ma has invaded our space, based on the crass monetizing of the “value” of a degree, and the unfounded assumption that only sky-high salaries will attract the “best” instructors. The more expensive your degree, the greater the chance it’s described as an “investment”. (Buy high, sell maybe.) Instead of a balance of professional and academic priorities, we’re driven by a fetishistic lust for anything “efficient” or “market-driven” (fetishistic because while it causes a few to throb with moist desire, in most it just elicits a shrug).

If law school were truly to be run like a business, the first change would have to be a massive raise in the amount of respect students/customers are afforded. You paid to be educated, by rights. If you didn’t learn, it’s the teacher’s fault for failing to deliver the product. What violence this would do for the current system, where you're largely responsible for teaching yourself in anticipation of an endless supply of pointless tests, exams, rankings, and evaluations.

A deal would be a deal. You would agree to a price, and that number would stay the same until the end of your degree. The cost wouldn't jump capriciously mid-way through your contract (even Rogers doesn't do that). And you'd get not just a consistent price but a consistent product. When you reserve a luxury sedan to find that the rental agency only has a hatchback remaining, you're entitled to a discount,

and probably an apology. The law building you ordered is not yet available, and you're told you'll have to make-do with shared lodgings and an abridged library. Only in law school do you pay for a Cadillac and drive home in a Pinto. Where's our discount?

For those who so trust in the free market that they would race down its path in the dark with no headlamps, remember this road runs two ways. The abysmal job market has seen the “value” of the degree stumble, and fall.

Where's the respect for the almighty market when it demands a lower price?

The worst of this is already well underway.

Gone are the days when our buildings and halls were named after great legal minds like Warren, Marshall, and Cardozo. In today's temples we worship only one thing. But the business model, like all fanaticism, isn't even internally consistent. Hal Jackman's donation—amply generous as it is—doesn't cover even a fifth of the cost of the building that will bear his name. The largest donors to the Faculty of Law are consistently the students, whose contributions have surpassed $15 million per year. Yet they are honoured by no gilded plaque or red-ribbon pageant.

Texas A&M—a public university—shocked some and appalled others when it posted an ad seeking a tenure-track English professor to “Provide Excellent Customer Service.” But really, no one who’s been paying attention can

International Presence. Local Essence.

claim to be surprised to find universities abandoning any pretense of being anything but vulgar retail outlets.

“Top” American schools—which generate positively-adolescent levels of insecurity in these parts—have begun to seal the deal by introducing a streamlined three year JD/MBA program. Once business school just accompanied law, but now it's actually replacing law. If that doesn't paint the picture for you, I don't know what will.

I can’t say I know a great deal about business, except what I can gather from common sense, which would seem already to add quite a lot to the current mode of thinking. If you were going to mimic the “best” schools in the world, you might start by copying their teaching methods, the materials they use, or their modes of evaluation. But we start (and end) by copying only their cost. If you take the same musty old law school and double, and triple, and quadruple, the price, it doesn’t become a better “investment”. It actually becomes a worse investment. Strange how this needs to be explained only to the supposedly business-minded.

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

14 | MARCH 26, 2014

OPINIONS

ultravires.ca

Point|Counterpoint

Which is the best year currently at U of T Law?

ARON NIMANI (1L)

POINT

Go ahead, say what you will about the 1Ls. Seriously. We love to hear it, because you’re going to say the 1L class is the best. We know because you say it all the time. See this quote from countless upper years: “The 1Ls are the best class in the last 3 years.” (Those were the words, Ben. Your memory is just going in your old age, along with your McGill Guide citation skills).

In response to Marita’s segment, consider this Haiku from one J. Stone. No, that’s too obvious. Let’s call him “Jordan S.” Ode to 1L class With merit, we all shall pass And, with class, kick ass We understand you can’t always compete with a newer model, but what makes us so much better?

People know us. Pub night? Dominated by 1Ls. Law games? All over it. Law ball? There in droves. Intramurals are practically half 1L, and we’re only a third of the class. We go hard.

Do you know a 1L? You probably know 70.

I’m sure you’ve seen Pat Chapman leading the pub nights (that’s leadership!) and you don’t have classes with us. How many 2Ls do you even know? (And I’m looking at you, 2Ls).

Maybe that’s unfair, 2Ls know they’re cliquey and boring. What about 3Ls? Sure, Ben’s a funny guy, but if you have to run Follies, start a Promise Auction, or be Robbie Santia for anyone to know your name, you’re working from an immeasurable deficit.

And 4Ls? Other than Louis outing himself to write for his class, do 4Ls ever come out of hiding? If you look carefully, you can spot them colouring outside the lines and misspelling words on the lounge cork board, but they don’t make an impact.

Don’t get me wrong, of course upper years are wonderful people. I mean, they’re great.

Probably. Maybe. Who can say for sure? Even

MARITA ZOURAVLIOFF (2L) the upper years don’t know most of their classmates. The 1Ls? We’re always there in numbers.

We don’t hold a grudge. You miss your building? You were told your structure is changing?

No more good old days? That’s tough, unless you’re a 3 or 4L, wallowing in the satisfaction of having the cheapest tuition and your own building, mistakenly crediting personal attributes and not just the luck of earlier admission years.

We didn’t even get the good old days, won’t see the good new days, and still have Admin. But far from anxiety we face it with resilience and solidarity. We’re a team, even with the upper years, and we’ll still sweat with you through the cardio workout of the Vic stairwell and chat with you in the Reading Room. Never mind the furnace we have to enter to visit our lockers (without a faculty-mandated buddy, thank you), we’re in the trenches with you! But make no mistake, we are going to come out on top. …What were those 1L hiring numbers again?

We’re holistic. What does that mean? Only Ben Alarie really knows. What’s important is we’re the first “holistic class” and it’s obviously working (Sorry, Marita, Ben’s stats clearly don’t lie). Maybe it’s equality? A majority of us will get the same grade after all (“P” for “awesome student who will get a great job”). Maybe it means we’re accepting? We *are* best friends with everyone (it’s okay, 2Ls, inclusiveness isn’t for everyone). And maybe it means we get Gabe Edelson. Talk about your year’s dime-pieces all you want, but have you seen Gabe? Forget Tyler Henderson’s dancing, Gabe tears up the dance floor and everyone who saw him at law ball, regardless of year or gender, wanted to know if he’s on the market. What upper year has that kind of pull?

DSB. Does anyone in your year have faculty promotional materials, and a Birge display case dedicated to his likeness? No. No they don’t.

COUNTERPOINT

By The 2Ls: Simply the Best “You might belong in 2L, Where dwell the brave at heart, Their daring, nerve and chivalry Set the 2L class apart."

The sorting hat has never made a mistake; every 2L bears the hallmarks of their class. A pioneering spirit. A robust social life. An undying concern for the greater good. While we continue to make the school, nay, the world, a better place, we are taunted as “lame” and wrongly branded as “takers”. Stop with the jealousy, haters. It’s unbecoming.

Fearless leadership—imagine being told that the structure by which you have led your academic life is abruptly moot. While the 3Ls continued comfortably with their A, Bs, and Cs, we had to forge a new road, rife with uncertainty and awkward conversations. We were the first class to have to explain during an OCI what the bloody difference between an H and a B+ is. “H is better,” we said with confidence. We’ve been faced with pull-down menus in job applications that ask for our grades and only give GPAs as options. And still, in the face of a declining job market, we outperformed and outshone the very 3Ls who have the audacity to call our class “no good at everything.”

Daring temperament—to the outsider, we may look a bit clique-y, but we do it for the betterment of the community. Law school is boring and a class that is *best friends with everyone* (looking at you, 1Ls) just adds to the dreariness of our day-to-day life. Our passionate and fiery dispositions keep the rumour mill going strong. “Did you hear Seamus attended the Force Field’s pre-drink last night?!

What’s he trying to do, wheel Lav?” Hello, drama!

Discussions like these keep 2L-life a vibrant and thriving oasis in a murky, monotonous sea of fakesmilin’ 1Ls, 3Ls, and 4Ls; if the makers of Laguna Beach ever came to U of T law, you know what class would be picked. May we also remind you that as clique-y as we might be, we would step into

the trajectory of a cruciatus curse for any of our fellow 2Ls. Martyrdom—the 1Ls anxiously wonder if they will see the Renewed Faculty of Law before they graduate. We assure you, we will never see the new building. The Bora Laskin Law Library was our home, and we were dragged from our humid enclave, never to return. But we didn’t look back, oh no. We set up our laptops amidst the undergrads and continued patrolling Facebook and watching funny cat vids as if nothing had happened. We did this for you, 1Ls, in the hopes that you, unlike us, will see the fruition of UofTLaw 2.0 and make the glorious homecoming trek through the museum subway station.

Stop being such ungrateful brats. You can indicate your appreciation by buying us tequila shots next pub night…yet another reason why we’re awesome. We love tequila.

Complete Dime-Pieces—the 1Ls like to tout their ‘holisticness’, but you could say the defining characteristic of any 2L is that they are the proverbial ‘whole package’. Take a certain J. S. Robinson as an example. He is an extremely typical 2L student. He has the bold courage of Harry, the brains of Hermione, and that certain je ne sais quoi of Ron. The 3Ls enjoy assuring the 1Ls that they are special and superior to us. But do not be fooled, 1Ls. The flattering words of the 3L are in fact just a meager attempt at revenge, as the 3Ls last year disparaged their class openly and called them “the ugliest class U of T law has ever seen.” We were assured that we were much better than them, which we indeed are. Fellow 2L’s, forgive the 3L class. Their envious sneers are merely a condition of their inferiority; they cannot help themselves.

The 4Ls gloat about their ‘majesty and transcendence.’ In truth, they simply refuse to graduate in a vain effort to meet the high standards set by 2Ls before them. Law school is a flat circle.

We will be and have always been the 2L class, the most glorious class in history.

OPINIONS

ultravires.ca BEN ISCOE (3L)

COUNTERCOUNTERPOINT A wise person once said that the 3L is a creature of knowledge, equipped with tools and the keen spirit to use them as they hone their craft. It is unclear who spoke these words, in what context or even if they were ever said, but they are a testament to the true character of the 3L. Let's consider what the 3L class has accomplished. They have been at the helm of Follies the last two years, spearheaded dialogue about tuition, created the Promises Auction, have been published and quoted in every major Canadian newspaper, and have Robbie Santia.

Now I'm not saying that one year is better than another, but all other years are clearly worse.

First we have the 1Ls (1Ls stay with me here; I know I'm moving quickly). Sure I can get lost staring into the eyes of Mr. St. Bernard, but after that what do they have? Let's see. These people never saw (Acting) Dean Duggan in his glory. What did he do you may ask? Let me tell you what he did! He did stuff! If you saw that man behind the Dean's desk you would know that man was not acting… oh no, he was deaning! And he deaned the shit out of it! And you never got to see it! Perhaps some attention should be paid to Aron’s reference to his class being “the best class in the last 3 years.” Aron if you’re going to quote, please quote accurately!

The quote was it “felt like the best class in the last 3 years.” This was a relative as opposed to an absolute statement. Your class was preceded by the current 2L class who made last year feel three times longer than it actually was. So yes, in comparison your class is the greatest thing since Martha Shaffer (aka “the shit” assuming the kids still talk like that).

Now let's move onto the 2Ls. Everyone take a moment. Think of your favourite 2L. You got one? Excellent. Now lock it in. At the same time, let's say our pick together. ONE. TWO. THREE! Yeah, I couldn't think of one either.

MARCH 26, 2014 | 15

LOUIS TSILIVIS (4L) Don’t feel bad though, the 2Ls are so lame that even they probably couldn’t think of one. I'm sure there are some 2Ls that do stuff and make this a better plac… I'm sorry I really can't finish that sentence with a straight face. They really are objectively terrible. In class, they contribute very little to FB threads about future deans (Leci '14) or the untimely death of Sriracha.

They attempt to take in knowledge and give back very little in return. A bunch of takers! I'm not one for generalizations or anything, but all 2Ls are no good at everything. I love that Marita’s boast of her class included being “faced with pull-down menus in job applications that ask for our grades and only give GPAs as options.” Really? That’s your version of overcoming adversity. For the love of g-d we had a student get shot at (on numerous occasions) while serving in Afghanistan!

Then there are the 4Ls, a term adopted in recent years to make this subset of our school feel special. This is reasonable; students requiring four years to do what others accomplish in three are special. We should genuinely all pitch in and encourage them, especially when you appreciate that the faculty legally disowns them for their second year. However, Louis should be commended for his work in this article. I can’t even fathom how long he spent on Wikipedia parroting historic references that he overheard in conversations as he furrowed his brow attempting to comprehend the content. If analogizing me to the eldest son of Pepin the Short is the best Louis the Short can do, then I can comfortably say that he is par for the 4L course.

Aron Nimani. “Point/Counterpoint: Which is the best year currently at U of T Law?” XV:VI (26 March 2014) [15]. For all those 1Ls that’s called a citation… and I didn’t have to spend 20 minutes with the reference librarians to figure out how to do this!

1

COUNTERCOUNTERCOUNTERPOINT

Why 4Ls are the Best / the Last Lights of Civilization Like the ancient magnificence of the Pyramid of Cheops, the graceful ruins of the Parthenon, and the eerily beautiful geoglyphs of Peru’s precontact Nazca peoples, the 4L class are lingering testaments to the glory of the Class of 2013. They are the last lights of civilization—of both an inclusive social dynamic that is exactly what the French meant when they spoke of ‘fraternité’, and of social gatherings that would make Gatsby’s parties look like children’s birthdays—that this law school has never seen since. In the social Dark Ages that has since descended upon our law school, the 4Ls are the Roman and Greek manuscripts that remind us of a bygone era of virtue and opulence.

Let me sing you the song of my people: Like waves of determined migrants to the Americas, we were the ones who came to Bora from faraway lands, who carved out a home for ourselves in the study tables at the south-facing windows, who named that home “Friendship Cove”. Like the coureur de bois and the Prairie settlers, we pushed the boundaries of pub night farther west than any class before us—all the way to Dufferin Street.

Like Dr Livingstone, we went on great adventures, with trips to Wasaga at the end of 1L and to Nicaragua for graduation. Like the greatest designers of Paris and Milan, we pioneered new styles, introducing deeper and deeper Vs and ushering in the era of the tank top. Like the revolutionaries across the world rallying around a cause— democracy, social justice, world peace—we came together and declared the tapir our mascot.

We had many hardships along the way. We had contracts in the Moot Court Room, which was impervious to wifi, and there was much suffering. Yet like the Israelites wandering the desert for 40 years without Facebook, we pushed on and persevered.

I do not expect any of those who have come after me to understand what any of this means.

Like ignorant barbarians who come across the most beautiful Sanskrit poetry, they will not be able to read it and comprehend the majesty and transcendence that it eulogizes.

The 3Ls are terrible. Like the Frankish kingdoms who came after the Romans, they understand their cultural inferiority and try to emulate the tastes of the classical period (mostly by mimicking the 4Ls’ affinity for Robyn). Also, Charlemagne barely ever bathed and was really smelly (and Ben Iscoe is Charlemagne).

The 2Ls are awful. Like the Vikings, they are prone to factionalism and squabbling and divisions among themselves. While they possess impressive physiques (e.g. Matt Budd) and are of renowned Nordic beauty (e.g. Lauren Harper, Eryn Fanjoy), they only use such gifts for raiding coastal villages and for taking Snapchats of themselves. Like Norse helms worn in battle, 2Ls wear toques inside the Birge-Carnegie Reading Room (e.g. Max Mandel, Ryan Tinney, Elliott Pobjoy). Like, they are deeply and emotionally obsessed with toques.

The 1Ls are the worst. They are like a New Age cult that thinks that Eckhart Tolle and Jabba the Hutt produced a love-child that is actually the Messiah, and holds its meetings in a suburban basement in Reno, Nevada. They have a whole cast of mysterious cult leaders: the charismatic founder David St Bernard; the likeable but powerhungry power-behind-the-throne Garth Murray; and the local strongman Gabe Edelson. St Bernard is rapidly losing influence and followers to the zealous Edelson, who fanatically preaches that all law students must stand up—rather than sit down—while doing readings at the library.

So while Flavelle Hall, our magna mater, lies empty and desolate, and while our numbers dwindle, we shall leave this school knowing that we are the last remnants of the most benevolent and wondrous cohort that ever was—and that after us come the barbarians, Franks, Vikings, and New Age cultists. Après 4L, le Déluge.

A Final Plea to Start the Revolution…or at Least a Conversation KATHERINE GEORGIOUS (3L) “Hi. Are you interested in sharing your thoughts on tuition?”

I was asking this question to students as part of a project worked on by the Tuition Advocacy Committee. Whether they supported the Faculty’s policies or not, I presumed students would have an opinion on the matter and share with me their thoughts. I was expecting interesting conversations, where I could learn from the different experiences of my peers. What I got was mostly wide-eyed looks of confusion and a quick dash into the Reading Room.

This is my final issue of Ultra Vires. And in my last article, I want to make a plea with you all. Care. About financial aid. About tuition.

Care about making the financial aid system as equitable as possible. Care about how an unsustainable financial aid pot can affect a student’s experience at this law school.

We can differ in opinion about how to make this school the best it can be while also maintaining accessibility. I think that this school would be lacking if we all had the same opinions on these matters. But what we can’t have is student apathy on this issue.

It can feel futile trying to get your voice heard at this school. In March of last year, multiple students attended meetings to give their feedback on the financial aid program. These same students then worked on a white paper on financial aid.

That white paper was never released to students.

I’m not sure if it even exists in any finalized form.

Working group meetings on financial aid were repeated again in the fall. I re-attended and said the same critiques that me and my fellow students have been saying about financial aid since the previous March. I imagine students said these critiques in past years. Yet in the three years I’ve been here, the front-end financial aid form has remained practically identical.

The communication channels between the general student body, the SLS, and the administration are broken. The administration and SLS are structured in a way that provides occasional outlets for the general student body to speak.

But they give you no indication of whether or not your ideas were actually heard, and whether your ideas are being implemented. If changes are made to financial aid, I will not know which town

halls, which surveys, and which UV articles were influential and which were not. No matter what policies the administration puts into place, they can simply tell the students that this was done “after consultation” without it being untrue.

The communication channels are also broken because the general student body is given little-tono information about how the administration actually works and what its current projects are. Faculty Council meeting minutes are not on the Faculty website. SLS meeting minutes haven’t been posted on the SLS website since November. We aren’t told what the SLS working groups are. We don’t know which students and which faculty members are put on these working groups. Hell, we really don’t even know what the Dean’s job is outside of feeding us muffins. Ordinary students can’t use the SLS as their advocate if they don’t even know what the SLS and the administration actually do.

I truly don’t believe that these flaws in our communication channels are due to bad faith on anyone’s part. The SLS is given a lot of work.

It’s hard for them to then have to do the very thankless job of synthesizing and communicat-

ing a summary of this work to students. They are also in the difficult position of having to discern what information is actually worth divulging to students, and what is too speculative or too far into the future to worry about now. Additionally, many SLS members spend multiple years on the SLS. Being on the “inside” for so long can easily make a person unaware of the information deficit that the general student body experiences.

While it will not be easy to better the communication channels between these three groups, that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t happen. And the only way it will happen is if we feel like we can speak up and talk. To each other. To our SLS members. We need to demand that our views are actually heard, and that we are given evidence that different student views were considered. We need to overhaul our methods of communication. Otherwise, tuition will keep on climbing, financial aid will remain at its problematic and unsustainable status quo, and the only communication we’ll have about this issue will be with ScotiaBank to further extend our lines of credit.

OPINIONS

16 | MARCH 26, 2014

ultravires.ca

Heard that you were talking sh*t and you didn’t think that we would hear it…

ANONYMOUS

O

kay so maybe not necessarily talking shit, and maybe no real connection to Gwen Stefani or Hollaback Girls … am I aging myself with that lyrical reference?…

Work with me here folks.

The law school community was less than thrilled with UT Law students’ disdain for the Professionalism and Ethics training. A little bird overheard some Osgoode professors and admin staff complaining about UT law students’ disdain for P&E training. Complaints were heard that law students simply don’t care about professionalism and ethics, and that UT Law as a faculty was not taking enough of an initiative with this training.

It’s an incorrect and sweeping statement to say students don’t care about P&E. We do. What we don’t care for are the efforts taken to teach

us professionalism and ethics. Or lack thereof.

See the difference? The problem lies not with students and their opinions but with the administration and their lackluster efforts. It’s hard to not care about P&E in a profession that is historically founded on precisely those two qualities. Yet not caring is made easy when students are made to passively sit through lectures absent real engagement with the topic at hand.

The problem is that the law school community is placing the blame on students and their lack of interest when the fault lies with them and the lax requirements for P&E training. Yes, LSUC requires law schools to provide some sort of ethics training, but it gives quite a bit of discretion to the respective law school administrators about how this training will be provided.

Evidence of this discretion is seen by the fact

that last year UT Law students had an entire week devoted to ethics, while this year students have two days (Ed. Note: Last year, our “week” was actually just three days—Mon-Weds). This is not to say that the number of days should be increased, or that a greater number of days leads to better training (i.e. two days is doable and preferable, many would agree). The issue is in the quality of the training. On the other hand, Osgoode has a class that’s devoted solely to Ethics, which is arguably more effective than our varied LPPE classes and ethics days combined.

However, I believe a credited class is not the way to go, especially since grading the class may have a tendency to force students to work for the grade and fail to absorb the core values of P&E (which is the whole point of the training).

Basically, don’t make it longer, don’t make

it a credited course, and don’t make people sit through lectures. Got it…so what should/could be done? As ineffective as the current model of P&E training at UofT is, two days is an adequate amount of time to sow the seeds for a life full of P&E. As for substance? Some tweaking is needed. Engage the students. Have more small group discussions and workshops. Bring in real life situations of ethical issues rather than working with just hypotheticals. Proactive learning.

A stimulating environment. Or something.

Bottom line: practice what you preach. If you want the students to care about the training, you have to show you care too.

Legal Methods and O-Week:

Seven reasons why an August start will ruin an august tradition ANDI JIN (3L), O-WEEK CHAIR IN 2012, SMALL BUSINESS OWNER AND CAT ENTHUSIAST

A

notable change in the 1L curriculum is the addition of the “Legal Methods” intensive, which has been scheduled to take place from August 18-29. Some cogent concerns have been raised with regard to this change. For example, students will, at best, need to pay out for an additional two weeks of rent. Also, students will need to swallow the costs of abbreviated summer employment. Finally, students will have to give up two weeks of August to sit through, probably, the most bullshit course this faculty has ever offered. Personally, if the admin forced me to miss Burning Man and Electric Zoo just to learn about some fucknut fox that died more than 200 years ago, I would burn this building to the ground. Terms-of-Enrampagement-style.

In addition to depriving the incoming year of the few sunlit weeks they have left before they are thrown unceremoniously into the harrowing abyss that is this faculty, the Legal Methods intensive will have serious impacts on Orientation Week 2014. There are seven notable concerns:

1

The curriculum changes push the beginning of school two weeks back. This means that next year's Orientation Week Chairs will have two fewer weeks to procrastinate prepare.

2

Upper Year Volunteers will be harder to come by. Most upper year students would prefer to have fun with their last weeks of summer, instead of having depressing conversations with what are essentially children. An actual conversation I had: 1L Student: “Andi, I did some reading ahead, and I don't understand Admin Law.” Me: “Fuck off. This is a pub crawl.”

3

Legal Methods is an actual for-credit course.

People will take it seriously—and fail to develop the sense of whimsy and romance necessary for dealing with faculty nonsense. Before you know it, we'll start seeing attendance at ethics week. Compulsory moots will be taken seriously. SUYRPs will actually get written. Law Review won't suck. Ten years later, you're in a

1L In Review ALEX CARMONA (1L)

W

ith the upcoming revamp of the 1L program next year, it looks like I get the last word on ours. Here’s hoping I can give it a fair send-off.

This year’s 1L was a unique mixture of new and old—new space, old program. We’ll be the only 1Ls in UT Law history to study for practice exams in Birge Carnegie (hooray for natural light in the reading room!) or endure Admin in Old Vic. Maybe that gives us some kind of unique perspective on the whole ordeal. Or, much more likely, it’s a funny quirk to point out,

and that’s about it.

Academically, 1L didn’t pack nearly as many surprises as I expected. Lots of readings? Check.

Eventual abandonment of many of the aforementioned readings? Check. Just a ridiculous amount of stress? Definitely a check, but not unmanageably so for most of us. Then again, with 100% finals coming up, there’s still plenty of time for 1L to turn around and kick our asses.

It’s really the law school community that has impressed me most over the course of the year.

I wrote an article in the October issue of UV

loveless marriage living in a shitty east-facing flat in Cabbagetown, eating pretentious organic Mac n Cheese on a Sunday night in your faded Calvin Klein pajamas, wondering for the hundredth time why the fuck she puts ketchup on hers.

4

Orientation Week won't be at the same time as TIFF. I mean, why do we even bother?

What's the point? It’s already hard convincing people that we're a top-tier glamorous institution when we have a sink full of filthy cups in a mouseinfested kitchen and no chairs for our three computers. Without the slim possibility of seeing some random celebrity on campus (likely because they got lost), we're basically a group home.

Orientation week may potentially need to run through the whole 2-week period. Two weeks!

Listen—even if I returned the money I embezzled in 2012, there is still no way we could afford this.

Breakfast would be a slice of Wonderbread and a half-cup of that dubious brown liquid they passoff for coffee in that obnoxiously cheerful nook in

5

lamenting the divide between Sections I and II, which was received with quite a bit of agreement. I couldn’t be happier to have been proven wrong. Despite the lack of a strong central location for us call our own, I think it’s fair to say we’ve really bridged the gap and become a year, rather than two individuals sections. Like Aron said: everybody is best friends with everybody.

And it doesn’t look like that strong, central location is coming any time soon. With construction on the new building now (predictably) behind schedule, we can look forward to potentially being the law school’s proverbial Moses— having put in our time in the desert, but never to step foot in the Promised Land. On the other hand, it’s hard to miss something you’ve never had, so the 1L class seems to have gotten used to Victoria College. At the very least, there seems to be a lot less grumbling, even after the reveal of the TreeGate fiasco. Plus, at least they’re ren-

the Northwest end of Old Vic. On the bright side, because the whole week is happening so early, we could save money by renting out a high school gymnasium for the semi-formal.

6 7

We can't make “September” by Earth Wind and Fire the theme song for O-Week anymore.

Law School Orientation won't run concurrently with Orientation Week for the undergraduate faculties and colleges. Picture a bunch of 1Ls in the reading room, feverishly pursuing some misguided effort to learn. As this is happening, a bunch of anaemic WASPy kids are marching about campus in Harry Potter gowns telling snooty jokes and actually getting off on the outrage their self-entitlement provokes. Meanwhile poorlydressed goons run around in purple-face, firing off that goddamn cannon of theirs every five minutes.

ovating some of the Old Vic classrooms.

Occupational concerns aside, and to again risk rehashing what Aron so definitively proved in the Point/Counterpoint, it’s remarkable how involved the 1L class was this year. We were a dominating presence at Call to the Bar, Law Games, Law Ball, intramurals, you name it.

There’s a 1L nominated to sit on the interim dean selection committee. Far more impressive is that a number of 1Ls even got speaking roles in Follies. With a much lighter academic burden and a greater leadership role within the school community next year, I’m hopeful that this involvement will only grow. And to the 1Ls who didn’t manage to get involved this year (if there even are any), I implore you to take part in something law school related next year that doesn’t involve a highlighter. It’s worth it—the reading room in Birge will still be there when you get back.

SPECIAL FEATURES/DIVERSIONS

ultravires.ca

MARCH 26, 2014 | 17

Professor Where Are They Now? Look at 3Ls’ Personal Statements Rankings A(Then) and Plans for Articling (Now) Tacky But Also Informative

ERYN FANJOY (2L)

T

he following are excerpts from the personal statements of members of the graduating class of 2014.

ERYN FANJOY (2L)

Professors

Score (the lower, the better)

Benjamin Alarie

1.27

Anita Anand

1.19

Lisa Austin

1.43

Alan Brudner

1.21

Vincent Chiao

1.33

Yasmin Dawood

1.04

Abraham Drassinower

1.38

Markus Dubber

2.11

Anthony Duggan

1.21

Anver Emon

1.50

Mohammad Fadel

1.76

Angela Fernandez

1.79

Martin Friedland

1.15

Andrew Green

1.75

Edward Iacobucci

1.22

Ariel Katz

2.66

Karen Knop

1.51

Brian Langille

1.71

Ian Lee 2.25 Jeffrey MacIntosh

1.92

Patrick Macklem

1.77

Audrey Macklin

1.45

Mayo Moran

1.10

Sophia Moreau

1.95

Jennifer Nedelsky

2.59

Anthony Niblett

1.04

Jim Phillips

1.39

Denise Reaume

2.91

Carol Rogerson

1.09

Douglas Sanderson

1.36

David Schneiderman

1.55

Ayelet Shachar

1.35

Martha Shaffer

1.03

Simon Stern

1.63

Hamish Stewart

1.18

Michael Trebilcock

1.36

Catherine Valcke

1.51

Stephen Waddams

1.06

Arnold Weinrib

2.00

Ernest Weinrib

1.36

Lorraine Weinrib

1.83

Albert Yoon

2.04

Jacob Ziegel

2.92

“I knew that being a lawyer was my destiny.

Arguing for a living? Getting to listen to the sound of my own voice all day? And to do it all in the name of justice? This career was perfect for me! As I entered high school I began to prepare for my career as a lawyer the best way I knew how: by reading Grisham novels and watching "Judge Judy". I soon had my entire career planned out: I would be a no-holds-bar prosecutor with a voice of steel and a heart of gold, ready to put all those rampant bad guys in jail. After about 20 years in the biz, I would accept a position as a Superior Court Justice, with the wisdom and experience to discern the guilty from the innocent.”

This student will be articling at Legal Aid Ontario, and has no interest in prosecuting crime. She still loves Judge Judy. This student is also shocked that U of T admitted her with this personal statement.

“The Law in Action Within Schools initiative is an example of the kind of engaged volunteerism I hope to have a strong presence in.

Not only does it align so well with my academic interest, but it allows me to continue to understand the city of Toronto in new and interesting ways.”

This student never volunteered for LAWS and will be articling at a large general service Bay St. firm.

“Law school is not a final goal in and of itself for me. I perceive it as another step along the path towards eventual public service. I am fully confident in my ability to contribute positively to public discourse and the legislative process through the role of an elected representative.”

This student will be working in petition and foreign investment review at a large Bay Street firm. He is ac-

tively involved in politics.

“It is often the things that are worked for, once achieved, that are the most fulfilling. As a result, I am confident that I can follow my heart and find fulfillment in a career which covers an amazingly broad subject area. I can say without fear that I am not sure which area of law I would like to pursue because I realize that, at a minimum, I will find enjoyment in the challenge presented by the profession, regardless of subject area… Despite this vague ambition, I do look forward to having a job where my work matters and has an impact, whether it is in government or the corporate world or any of the many other places a legal education could take me.”

This student discovered what he wanted to do (litigation) and followed his heart (“and the money”) to a big firm in Calgary.

“I always wanted a career that would enable me to work with people, and more importantly, help them. The law was constructed to protect people, to give each and every individual basic human rights that should never be violated. Unfortunately, these rights are sometimes violated and people are mistreated, but they lack the ability and knowledge to defend themselves. This is precisely the reason I want to study law. I want to be able to help these people and fight for justice.”

This student will be articling at a boutique law firm with expertise in civil litigation, corporate, franchising and intellectual property.

“I have been afforded many great opportunities, including the possibility of applying to law school, and however clichéd this may sound, I truly believe this comes with a responsibility; I hope to use my legal training to make a positive and meaningful contribution to those people

and communities who may not have access to the same opportunities that I have… [T]he areas of law that I think I might be interested in pursuing professionally, including refugee, or child and family law, involve using legal tools to do just that.”

This student will be articling with Legal Aid Ontario in some combination of criminal, family, refugee law and clinic work. She is actively involved in public interest work at the law school.” “[T]he impact of the law on a more micro level is what has interested me the most; how the law comes to critically define us as citizens, moral beings, and agents for change. In particular, I am interest in how the law can be used to empower people by correcting social gradients within the realm of public health …

The opportunity for clinical legal education is of great interest to me, especially the University of Toronto’s Health Equity and Law Clinic. …

[Law school] would allow me to learn how to approach public health issues at a grassroots level. Helping those disadvantaged by remediable public health inequities by through community and individual level capacity building is my ultimate goal.”

This student plans on articling at a boutique firm that specializes in insolvency and financial restructuring.

“After graduation, I would be keen to use my law degree to help build a more just and sustainable society - likely by pursuing a career with an environmental or human rights NGO or entering municipal politics.”

This student is working for a Seven Sister firm on Bay Street that often advises Chinese firms seeking to buy stake in Canada's oil sands. He is divided between pursuing a career in commercial litigation or in corporate law.

Lessons on Life and Law from my Little One TALI GREEN (2L)

I

figured that between eating horizontally, seeing upside down, and copious amounts of napping, my son is likely to develop some valuable insights. Curious, I asked him to share some life lessons that would be of value to law students at this pivotal time in their lives. He had me type these up for him, as his word-processing skills are still developing:

10 things that U of T law students can learn from an 8-week-old:

3

Practice being Zen. My field of vision is about 18 inches and that helps me focus on the here and now.

7

4

8

The secret to work/life balance is to fit work into your sleeping schedule. Between sleeping (about 16 hours a day) and eating (about 4 ounces every 3 hours), I manage to get a lot of important work done (like digesting and meeting developmental milestones).

1

5

2

6

For best results at school and work, don't take on too much at a time. Last week I focused on forming a smile and lifting my head. This week I'm working on grabbing things and putting them into my mouth.

Don't be afraid of change when you feel like you're not being challenged anymore. I get changed about 6 times a day after reaching, and occasionally surpassing, my goals. I always feel better afterwards.

Get out of your comfort zone and try new things. I know, I know—easier said than done. It took me 9 months to finally put this thought into action.

Being cute and/or bawling hysterically are generally the most effective negotiation tactics. I find that this works best when the other party is a sympathetic parent with a vested interest in the proper development of my nervous system.

Mediation works most effectively when both parties are willing to put aside their differences. And change a diaper together.

During discovery, trust your gut. They can scream "Bath time Is SO MUCH FUN!!" all they want. I know better: bath time is not that fun.

9

Section 11(d) is a total sham. You turn around for one second and BAM—they throw you behind bars for nothing and don't even think twice.

10

Prices are dictated by supply and demand. If the best baby stores can get away with charging exorbitant prices ($18.99 for a beanie??), then so can the best law schools.

Besides, my tuition is going to be about 20 times higher than yours, so stop complaining.

18 | MARCH 26, 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

DIVERSIONS

ultravires.ca

Expectation vs. Reality Exam Edition LISANA NITHIANANTHAN (1L)

Social Life

Expectation: Study for a few hours, take a break and maybe hang out with a friend or watch a movie before returning to some more studying.

Your boyfriend’s birthday? No worries, you can take the night off from all that studying. You got a lot of work done so one night won’t hurt you.

Besides, you deserve a night off.

Reality: The most social interaction you’ve had is when you ask someone to watch your prized possessions (i.e. your laptop, purse/wallet with your Scotia Bank card and coffee card, not to mention those heavy textbooks) while you run to the washroom. This is what your life has become.

Mealtimes

Expectation: You have options, go out to grab something to eat, meet up with friends for a meal, or cook yourself something. The choice is yours.

Bonus: you need not sacrifice nutrition in favour of keeping your spot in the library since you won’t need to be holed up in there. You have yet another choice of eating at your place, or out. Ah, choices.

Reality: Nutrition? Hahahaha. The last time you’ve had a full meal…may have been when Ford was Mayor…wait is he still Mayor? All that caffeine has got you trippin! So much so that you wonder where in the food pyramid your coffee would be… only to realize your entire pyramid would consist of coffee beans (and Red Bull, if you’re lucky).

Study Space

Expectation: You don’t really require that much space, you’re only going to be in the library for an hour or so. If there’s no space, you can study at home, NBD. Reality: Can’t study at home because that always

leads to you falling asleep in bed. So you either live in the library or the Reading Room at Birge. You spend more time in these locations than you do anywhere else. Even home (you’re seriously considering having your mail redirected here). When you leave the fluorescent Reading Room (for those rare occasions where you go grab coffee or opt to go home and shower) your eyes always have trouble adjusting to the sunlight.

All-nighters

Expectation: Losing the recommended 8 hours of sleep to study? That is SO undergrad. Besides, you don’t need that much time to study. You’ve been studying plenty during the waking hours and can afford, no DESERVE that time to sleep.

Reality: Rationalizing that if you stay up all night you will be able to understand Property Law AND finish your summaries. Right after you get through your readings…so…maybe no sleep for the next 2 days?

Still panicked…You entertain the very real concern that you might fall asleep during an exam.

You lose sleep over the possibility of losing sleep and making up for that lost sleep in a place where you’re not supposed to be sleeping! These marks matter. These marks matter. THESE MARKS MATTER. If you don’t do well, you won’t get a job for 2L and if you don’t’ get a job for 2L , then you will be unemployed as a 3L…no articling… no job…no income…no way to pay off enormous debt…You panic some more. Get anxious reading case with “bad law” and yet feel like you can relate to the sheer confusion the judges seem to be stating. If by any stroke of luck you manage to get some sleep, you wake up at 3 am to ponder why a groom would think he can sue a blacksmith for the bride marrying someone else when he was late.... realize you are wasting precious time that could be spent sleeping…Sleep…oh… You lose sleep over the possibility of losing sleep and making up for that lost sleep in a place where …*bawls*

Showering

Admin

Expectation: A must. Everyday. Twice on some days.

Reality: Strictly optional, ain’t nobody got time for that! * *this is a public service announcement, out of consideration for your fellow students, please make time for this, if nothing else.

Anxiety/Panic/Stress

Expectation: Having gone through this ordeal last term during ‘fail-safe’ exams, you are calm and ready to conquer Crim, Contracts, Constitutional and the other non-C classes.

Reality: Fail-safes…yeah…nope. Still anxious.

Expectation: Having religiously done your readings throughout the term and completely understanding the intricacies of Canadian administrative law, you breeze through your map/ summary. At one point during your review, you have an epiphany and finally understand the difference between patently unreasonable and unreasonable. You chuckle to yourself that it took you this long to notice the distinction.

Reality: So wait…patently…what? Oh thank God for Wikipedia.

The Highlighter Method

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 think one of my profs is REALLY cute.

Once exams are over, it's fair game right?

Should I send him nudie pics or just wait for him in his office, naked, lying on his desk?

—Teacher's pet

You clearly haven’t read my book Getting to Climax: How to Excel at Law School Exams. If you had, you would know that you should have kicked off the year with getting down and dirty with every one of your profs, no matter how geriatric or frigid. You know what H is short for right? HJ, obviously. What in god’s name have you been doing all semester? Attending lectures? Gallivanting with your peers at pub night? READING? Attending office hours wearing nothing but sus-

penders and a red fez should have been top priority. You don’t get to know your profs by sticking your hand up in class. You gotta stick your hand up somewhere else if you wanna get anywhere in this cruel, carnivorous world.

Now that I have sufficiently chastised you for your social failings, I will give you some advice my old aunt Bethesda gave me: “If you show up nekked, they’ll love ya. But if you show up nekked with bacon bits and maple syrup smeared all over yer body, the fornicatin’ will be better.” She was a highly respected Supreme Court justice back where I’m from. Scalia used to call her for advice all the time.

PS: If you need a pair of suspenders, I know a guy.

Kisses, Dr. V

this divine method during O-Week and having 7 months to hone your highlighting skills, you are ready to apply this life skill to April Exams and highlight your way to a neon HH. Reality: Having never actually learned this socalled method, you wonder if this was a mere ploy by the upper years. This suspicion is the sole reason you refrain from openly asking an upper year “what the hell is the hilighter method and why have I yet to encounter a single soul who will teach me the ways?!” Instead you take it upon yourself to learn this method…you’d have been better off dipping your white summary sheets in bright yellow hi-lighter fluid. Same result.

Time Management

Expectation: First term you learned second hand from your peers (not firsthand of course!

You’re always on top of your readings) the stress that accompanies falling behind on readings and having to get caught up before doing summaries/ maps/reviews. You manage to stay on top of all your readings (as usual) and have already started studying for finals with 3 weeks to go.

Reality: You experienced first-class time management fails last term, and yet here you are again. You hear people already started studying for exams…and feel the anxiety crush your soul.

You should start. Soon. But you have to do the readings first. Soon.

Finally Finishing

Expectation: Celebrating with your friends in a dignified manner. Catching up with friends, family, sleep (showers). Consider reading up on some of those “recommended readings” that you simply could not devote time to during the year. Maybe taking off for a few weeks to go travelling and nurture your soul before returning to do your highly anticipated 1L job. All the while revelling in the knowledge that YOU HAVE SURVIVED. Reality: FREEDOM!!! *cries* Celebrate like only law students know how: you FREAKING SURVIVED. Spend your entire summer prioritizing sleep, regardless of what you do this summer (firms, faculty, travel, volunteer, etc.).

Expectation: After incessantly hearing about

Dear Dr. V, I got pretty wild at law ball. As in I might have sucked face with the guy serving the poutine. The thing is, it was HOT. Should I pursue him?

—Gravy in love

Dear Dr Valencourt

MARCH 26, 2014 | 19

Dear Gravy, HALLELUJA!!! Finally, a gal with my kind of sensibilities. This reminds me so much of my high school prom…oh, the memz! After downing a bottle of peach schnapps, shimmying my glorious breasts on the dancefloor, I found myself going to town on the hot new janitor in the supply cupboard (he was on night duty). I know what you’re all thinking, and yes, he was wearing his sexy uniform when I went down on him. He also had some personal style—he was wearing suspenders under his blue janitor’s jumpsuit. Very sexy. And before you get all up in arms about the age difference, know that I was 19 at the time—legal as hell.

I failed most grades a few times in high school.

Spent too much time behind the building huffing helium with the school crossing guard (we were both bored as hell during those long high school years. Oh Laila, how I miss your loud cackle and the way your voice got all squeaky when you took a hit of helium…like Tinkerbell on crack. Where are you now? We were so close! You taught me how to French kiss! I’ll never forget the feel of your dry, weather-beaten lips). Those were some formative years, let me tell ya.

Now Gravy, of course your poutine petting was hot—and please, tell me you used the gravy to your advantage! There’s nothing like licking off hot brown liquid from your lover’s body. Pursue the hell of that guy—you already know he has a job, in the food industry no less! Lock that man down before some other lucky lady (or lad, I don’t want to discriminate here, Gravy—you could be

male or female for all I know!) pisses on that tree and claims it for her own. Procreate with that poutine-covered penis.

Dr. V Dear Dr. V, What if you notice two 1Ls in love, but they aren't getting it on—what should you do to help?

—Matchmaker/creep

Dear Matchmaker/creep, First of all, you’re a saint! You don’t see enough of this kind of charity work these days. These youngins are like delicate flowers, ready to bloom. You’ve got to help open up them legs, so they can experience the wet ‘n’ wild world of law school hook ups. With your help, they can be bumpin’ uglies in the Pratt handicap bathroom in no time. If one of them is too timid to make a move, you’ve got to step in and be the guiding hand. As in take that delicate and virginal first year hand and put it down the pants of the other. Keep your own hand in there for good measure. That’s good. Yeeeaa.

Timing is of the essence—everyone needs a good study break buddy during the torment that is exams. There’s nothing like a good climax to rejuvenate the body. I remember when I worked at the faculty, there was nothing more depressing than finding a 1L jerking one out in an abandoned corner of the library. Faced with such a disheartening sight, I would immediately strip down to my skivvies and garters and dive in for some fun, though granted amateurish, fun. It’s only the right thing to do. In the words of my close and personal Jewel everybody needs somebody sometimes.

With respect, Dr. V

DIVERSIONS

20 | MARCH 26, 2014

No Bake Energy Bars YALE HERTZMAN (2L)

ultravires.ca

Professor Celebrity Look-A-Like of the Month ANONYMOUS

vs.

Step aside, Nature Valley.

There’s a new bar in town.

Chocolate Dipped Chewy Bars, Nutrigrains, and Lara Bars pale in comparison to these home-made energy bars. While store-bought bars are undoubtedly convenient and delicious, they have their downsides:

1

Expensive. $2.99 for an energy bar, really? Unless you have direct access to Costco or an account in the Cayman Islands, buying energy bars daily are likely to suck the energy out of your wallet.

2

That KIND bar may not so kind after all. Purportedly healthy energy bars can be riddled with processed and unnatural ingredients. Soy isolate protein, what are you? If you need to a chemical engineering degree to understand the ingre-

Anthony Niblett

Justin Timberlake

(image from UofT Website)

(image from www.celebhairdo.com)

dients in your food, you probably should not be eating it.

3

Deceiving. The package will say something like “chocolateflavored” but inside is something that looks like and tastes like an actual brick.

Treat yourself right with one of these home-made, no-bake energy bars. You read it correctly: there is no baking required. Even if you are the worst cook alive—you burn toast, you use your oven as a storage space, and you don’t know how to make a pate en croute - you will be able to make these energy bars. Is time an issue? Of course it is—you’re a law student! From start to finish, these bars take 20 minutes to make. Meaning your precious Tort readings will not have to wait for long.

Ingredients: • 2 cups of quick-cook oats, uncooked • ⅔ cups of dates (can also substitute for dried cherries or raisins) • 1 cup all-natural peanut or almond butter • ¼ cup of maple syrup or honey • 1 tbsp of chia seeds • 1 tsp of cinnamon • 2 tsp vanilla • P inch of salt

Directions: • M ix all of the ingredients together in a large bowl.

• Spread the mixture into a pan and refrigerate for at least 2 hours.

• Slice into bars and enjoy!