Jump to content

cluj

Members
  • Content count

    137
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

50 Decent People

1 Follower

About cluj

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

643 profile views
  1. Law School Debt

    Okay, okay, let me ask something that has been bugging me ever since I started practicing law (just a couple of years back). And I preface it by saying that I count over 55+ countries/territories from my pre-law practice days, and many of those are not just "bucket list" pit stops, but in some cases 15-30+ days spent in one country, including two 3-to-4-month stints in each of South America and SE Asia, all on a stingy but more-than-hostel budget. How do those of you who are practicing find the energy to plan and execute such non-all-inclusive trips to drool-inducing destinations? I mean, I am a clear supporter of "do-not-go-to-all-inclusive-if-you-have-more-than-one-week-and-even-then", but now I feel like I need to get away to recover just to be able to come back and put in more sweat and (few) tears into my work. I love working as a lawyer, don't get me wrong; and I have enough travel experience to be able to plan and execute with ease, even economically--but I cannot easily envision a time in the near future where "all inclusive or similar" won't be the first thing I think of for going on a 1-2 week vacation. NB: I recognize I am contributing to taking this thread way off topic. So mods can feel free to move to an "off topic" thread, like that started by @lioness a while back. To keep it somewhat on topic, I will address @healthlaw's travelling ambivalence: I would certainly choose to travel in the hiatus before articling, because it's not just an issue of finances and finding the time, but also an issue of finding the energy to dedicate to active and itinerant travel.
  2. Will Robots Take My Job?

    But is this a criticism of/thinking about Canada "poaching" talent; or of individuals being given a chance to seek better opportunities according to their judgement, and potentially finding that they overestimated said opportunities? I see @Coolname's point on legitimately worrying about the brain drain of foreign countries whose needs for that brain power is arguably higher than Canada's. However, it may be a tad patronizing to further conclude that worry alone justifies saying to those individuals that they should be denied the free arbiter to pursue whatever opportunities they saw fit to pursue (within the confines of whatever immigration system), however (mis)guided the pursuit. If we stipulate to taking international boundaries out of the equation for just a moment, one would not argue that a highly-skilled Newfie should be restricted/prohibited from pursuing a higher quality job in Alberta, because she would have some patriotic obligation towards Newfoundland and/or because Alberta should take a high-minded approach to protecting the caliber of the workforce in Newfoundland, equalization and all... And someone might even empathize on a personal level if the Newfie in that example makes a potentially bad call because of not fully understanding the context in Alberta, but still... [feel free to interchange provinces, swap others, make up names; or blame it on the immigrant lacking context].
  3. Trinity Western Loses 7-2

    You should remember you'd have to transfer to Hong Kong and Singapore to attend (some classes at) that basement law school..., which might require going through the NCA to become licensed back in Canada
  4. Okay. Okay. I stopped laughing. Involuntary humour... it's been a long day in court... Point taken, though: I wouldn't have had a chance or the energy to walk anybody/anyone/anything at the end of it, especially during articling.
  5. Has everyone who is asking for extras actually gone by the 'signing of the rolls' in the basement cafeteria and asked staff there directly? I might have just been lucky, but when I asked in a previous year, their reply was "how many extra do you need?". NB: The Law Society takes naming rights for first-borns anyhow; I think it's in the bylaws somewhere...
  6. I have to draw your attention to the lack of precision in your Canadian-mindset analogy. The fact that you, a Canadian, referred to the California bar exam actually means more: that it is "internationally-recognized as high-quality, psychometrically-defensible professional qualification assessment". All of those characteristics are attributed to that one blog reference by the LSO report. To be fair, however, the analogy is not complete until you make your first blog post about it. Give us a link. Posting on an online forum is not of sufficiently high scholarly caliber... [Apologies to the moderators for tarnishing the academic creed of ls.ca :)]
  7. I am sure everyone will be relieved to hear that the LSO Committee's report supports maintaining the current barrister and solicitor licensing examinations because... [See Report, p. 16, second paragraph, including one reference to scholarly content....] **Bonus points for spotting the one instance in the quote above where hyphenation is incorrect. Is it: a) the first; b) the second; c) the third; or d) ask your client?
  8. Requesting fourth attempt!

    You will have an ... answer. With the Law Society (LSUC o/a LSO), depending on who your first point of contact is, it might be a partial or incomplete answer. For something with such potential impact on the OP, I would insist on reading and finding out everything I could (if anything else) before making the request. [To be fair, this happens with many organizations administering complex rule-based programs; I single out the Law Society for criticism because one would think they should know/implement better.] I agree, though, that the Law Society should be the first (and last) point of contact on this.
  9. Loan Repayment

    OSAP does not consider one a student while articling (or doing any kind of [paid?] internship, including the LPP work placement); and you have to make payments starting 6 months after the end of you law school studies. Interest accrues during those 6 months. OTOH, the 4-month "virtual" part of the LPP at Ryerson or uOttawa is considered a hybrid period, during which you may defer payment and interest does not accrue if you apply for that deferral. Further, if there are periods of low or no income before or after articling/LPP you may aapply for Repayment Assistance, which effectively freezes your loan repayment obligations and outstanding balance for six months [interest payments are made by the government; and you are not expected to make payments, or make partial payments towards loan principal, geared to income]. Caveat: not legal advice--read the applicable information provided by the loan program, and the applicable legislative framework for full details.
  10. Transitioning to Regulatory Law

    1) Mine was meant to be a humorous remark. I endorse the message about working on weekends being... less than pleasant for most of us. 2) That is a great qualifier as to how you stay outside of the gray area altogether. In my limited experience, I find many/some non-practicing lawyers in the field to be less strict about their involvement. Wow, unlimited legal budgets (or even ones somewhat restricted, but generous) are something to envy. Even when practicing law, one yearns for getting opinions from some niche specialists. I wish...! Well, maybe I should make the pitch for more CPD, but that still does not fully solve the matter.
  11. Screwups and Faceplants

    Is there more context to that; or am I too dense to get how such a turn of phrase would be regret-inducing under any circumstances...?
  12. Transitioning to Regulatory Law

    I keep insisting on the same distinction. I actually call it "LSUC o/a LSO" in circles that entertain professional sarcasm. It also appears one of kurrika's data points has been further refined to: "being a client is awesome, except on weekends and statutory holidays, with snarki-ness particularly high around 8:30 am on Saturdays". More directly to one of OP's questions: many lawyers in not-strictly-law regulatory positions register in the 50% fee category with the law society. I have heard and participated in many discussions about how they might still actually be engaging in some of the expansive definition of 'practicing law', which seems to be a gray area.
  13. That's a laudable EDI initiative, no?
  14. Quitting 2L Offer

    I am sure @providence follows the rule about zealous advocacy above all. Just wait until OP retains her for the Good Character hearing that is never going to happen... I admit I was trying to argue against it, pushed at the margins, just because it seemed the position was pushed to 23 out of 10. You're wrong. It is not NCA candidates. They are law students from the newly established law school in Beverley McLachlin's own basement.
  15. Quitting 2L Offer

    Yes. It's obvious from this thread that lawyers just give up because "rules are rules"...
×