Foreign-qualified lawyers must obtain a Certificate of Qualification from the National Committee on Accreditation (“NCA”) to practice in Ontario. The NCA, a standing committee of the Federation of Law Societies of Canada (“FLSC”), examines the qualifications of foreign-qualified lawyers and makes recommendations on behalf of the Law Society of Upper Canada (“LSUC”), and all other law societies in Canada, as to the further study of law required before the applicant can enter a particular bar admission program. The NCA process can be challenging, especially for those with limited prior connections to Ontario. In this program, speakers will discuss the NCA program and the subsequent LSUC requirements, and will provide tips for success during the NCA process and beyond, i.e., with respect to acquiring an articling position and practicing law. This free-to-attend program will benefit both NCA applicants and those who wish to know more about hiring foreign-qualified lawyers. The program will be followed by a free-to-attend networking reception hosted by the Ontario Bar Association.

Chairs:
Michaelle Louise Simard,Krylov & Company Barristers
Guillermo Cruz Cruz Herrera Ltd

Speakers:
Paul Sweeny, OBA President
Deborah Wolfe, DManaging Director of NCA
Gina Alexandris, Director, Internationally Trained Lawyers Program, University of Toronto Faculty of Law
Kara Sutherland, Director of Professional Resources, Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP
Daphne Simon, Associate Registrar, Law Society of Upper Canada Faculty of Law
Angela Sordi, Consultant, ZSA Legal Recruitment
Hugo Leal-Neri, PhD candidate at University of Toronto

Details
Date: Monday, October 17, 2011
Time: 2:15 pm Registration | 2:30 pm Program with Q&A period | 4:30 pm Program concludes followed by Reception
Location: The Conference Centre at the OBA, 20 Toronto Street, 2nd Floor

Register for Live Program | Program Details

**This is a complimentary program**

“Canadian immigrants are underemployed, and the Ontario Liberals think they have a solution: Help employers hire immigrants so they can get Canadian work experience. It may be well-meaning, but it is ultimately an inefficient and divisive policy.

The proposal would give $10,000 to employers to defray costs associated with training and mentorship needed to achieve Ontario certification. It’s focused on regulated professions – jobs in fields such as accounting, law, teaching, engineering, forestry and early childhood education.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/ontario-liberal-immigrant-hiring-proposal-is-discriminating-politics/article2155512/

Check out the comments too.

Top U.S. class-action lawyer coming to Canada

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/the-law-page/top-us-class-action-lawyer-coming-to-canada/article2017397/singlepage/#articlecontent

Ontario’s move to allow American-style shareholder class-action lawsuits has attracted a feared and revered Wall Street plaintiffs’ lawyer to the province just as the pendulum is swinging away from similar suits in the United States.

Michael Spencer, a senior partner who sits on the executive committee at Milberg LLP – one of the original class-action firms – is preparing to practise law in Canada.

More from The Law Page

• Spine broken on vacation, woman’s lawsuit tests courts
• Fighting against being forced into retirement
• Why judges like ‘hot-tubbing’

He was most recently a lead counsel in the Vivendi SA shareholder lawsuit that left the French media company facing an eye-popping $9.3-billion (U.S.) damage award for misleading investors.

The size of that award was reduced by the courts. But Mr. Spencer, who recently led a U.S. class action against a French company on behalf of American, French, British and Dutch investors, is at the epicentre of the globalization of securities class actions.

That epicentre will soon be stationed part-time in the offices of Kim Orr Barristers PC, a Toronto class-action boutique, working on Canadian and cross-border cases.

Mr. Spencer makes no bones about why, at the pinnacle of his career, he is prepared to swap the perks of a privileged life in Manhattan for Toronto. It’s because of Ontario’s Bill 198, enacted in 2005, which allows shareholders who buy stock on the open market to sue if they feel a company misrepresents its financial situation.

Ordinarily, an amendment to provincial securities law would not attract the attention of someone in Mr. Spencer’s ambit, but these are not ordinary times for U.S. class-action lawyers.

Eight years of Republican rule made both the courts and the U.S. Congress more conservative. Under pressure from big business to wipe out so-called strike suits – lawsuits filed in the hope the target will find it cheaper to settle than to fight – they’ve been cracking down by tightening pleading standards for shareholder class actions and punting such suits out of state court and into federal jurisdiction.

Then there is the decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank, a knockout blow upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court last summer. It says investors who buy shares on a non-U.S. exchange cannot pursue a claim under U.S. securities laws. That pretty much precludes any future global class action like Vivendi ever again being run out of a New York court.

Set that against an Ontario decision last year to take jurisdiction over a global class of shareholders in Silver v. Imax Corp., and Toronto’s appeal becomes obvious.

“Simply put, Canada presents a great opportunity,” Mr. Spencer says from his Milberg office in New York.

The opportunity was so compelling that the Yale and Harvard-educated lawyer, an alumnus of the blue-chip New York firm of Cravath Swaine & Moore LLP, “sweated through” a three-day essay-style exam in Toronto in October just to get his Canadian law-school equivalency.

“I had to study Canadian constitutional law and criminal law, subjects thought to be distinctly Canadian. For someone who is 35 years out of law school, that was a pretty daunting task.”

It didn’t end there. Mr. Spencer next had to plow through “masses of material” for two days of barrister and solicitor exams administered by the Law Society of Upper Canada. He then applied for an exemption from articling for 10 months, the internship normally required of law school grads.

The Law Society informed him last month that his exemption had been granted, so all that remains is a three-day course this week on professional conduct and practice management in Ontario.

Once that is done and he gowns up for the first time to be called to the bar in Ontario, the relatively young world of Canadian shareholder class actions could be in for a shakeup.

The number of lawyers who have tried shareholder class actions in Canada can be counted on one hand. That’s because only one, involving Danier Leather Inc., has ever gone to trial. The plaintiffs lost.

The overwhelming majority are either knocked out or settled by shareholders’ lawyers early for a portion of the claim, removing the potential cost of losing.

Won Kim, the Canadian class-action lawyer whose offices Mr. Spencer will call home when he’s in Toronto, says that’s about to change.

“In order to get the big awards that properly compensate damaged shareholders, we’re going to have to try these cases,” Mr. Kim says. “What Mike brings to the table is that he’s tried literally the biggest securities case in the United States. He brings a wealth of experience. His results speak for themselves.”

Those results are the product of a fierce intelligence and relentless work ethic, says Matthew Gluck, a Milberg partner who worked alongside Mr. Spencer on the long Vivendi trial.

“It starts with brains,” Mr. Gluck says. “He’s very smart and a real thinker. He’s also a very hard worker. If he’s making a legal argument, he will have read every case in the brief, digested it and anticipated all the possible problems. He is a very careful lawyer.”

He’s also extremely experienced. Mr. Spencer has tried several dozen class actions, many against big names such as Bayer Group, AT&T, Intuit Inc., Pacific Life Insurance, Equitable Life Assurance Society, Ernst & Young and virtually all the tobacco companies.

In 2006, four senior partners at Milberg’s predecessor firm, Milberg Weiss LLP, were indicted on charges they had run a 30-year kickback scheme, secretly paying people to serve as lead plaintiffs. The partnership agreed to pay $75-million (U.S.) in a non-prosecution agreement, and the U.S. government recognized the misconduct did not extend to anyone else currently at the firm.

In fact, an Ontario court said in unrelated case in 2009 that the current Milberg “does not bear the mark of Cain,” and referred to the “fine reputations and excellent credentials” of Mr. Spencer and his colleague on that case.

In Canada, the on-the-ground presence of a lawyer like Mr. Spencer may prove to be a game-changer, says Robert Staley, a corporate defence litigator lawyer at Bennett Jones LLP.

“I know him by reputation; he’s one of the top plaintiff securities class-action lawyers in the United States,” Mr. Staley says. “To be blunt, there’s a perception that some Canadian plaintiff firms don’t have the heft to take cases to trial, and that influences how they settle. With somebody like Michael Spencer in the mix, it certainly adds more credibility to the threat to try cases.”

So should officers and directors of listed Canadian corporations be uneasy at the prospect of Mr. Spencer turning his gaze to Canada?

“I’m not someone who wants to blow my own horn but I hope we can bring a level of sophistication and experience in prosecuting these cases as well as resources, both financial and in terms of experience, that will support the plaintiffs’ side,” he says.

“And yes, I hope it does give pause to anyone who would be contemplating violating the law.”

With files from The Wall Street Journal

Special to The Globe and Mail

Conservative Leader Stephen Harper

Stephen Harper’s government met the challenge of the global economic crisis head on with our world-leading Economic Action Plan. Support for foreign credentials recognition has been a key part of our economic agenda. In 2009, we invested $50 million over two years for the development and implementation of the Pan-Canadian Framework for the Assessment and Recognition of Foreign Qualifications. This funding has helped to streamline the recognition process in a number of important occupations and made it easier for foreign-trained Canadians to use their skills and expertise in Canada.

But some foreign-trained workers still have difficulty paying for tuition and other training costs associated with the foreign credential recognition process. A re-elected Stephen Harper government will provide bridge loans to help recent immigrants pay for the training and skills upgrading needed for their foreign credentials to be recognized here in Canada. The Conservative Party understands the importance of credential recognition to the financial security and well-being of new Canadians and their families, as well as the Canadian economy.

http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/canada/article/837284–be-heard-the-conservative-party-answers-your-questions

The Green Party

The Green Party finds fault with the current accreditation system, especially with the lack of recognition of foreign credentials. We would eliminate the valuation of foreign credentials for immigration purposes except in those cases where such credentials are recognized in Canada, or a clear, expeditious path to accreditation is established, and in place establish realistic criteria for immigrants based on existing job opportunities for immigrants to Canada. We would also press professional societies to remove unnecessary barriers hindering the recognition of valid professional credentials of immigrants.

http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/canada/article/837261–be-heard-the-green-party-answers-your-questions

The Bloc

The evaluation and the recognition of credentials is Quebec’s and the other provinces’ responsibility. The Quebec government has been working on ways to facilitate the movement of workers. We support these efforts.

Quebec is, to a certain extent, autonomous in terms of immigration. Unfortunately, the actual agreement with the federal government doesn’t allow us to put forward all the values that characterize Quebec. The only way Quebec will be able to deploy a more efficient and humane policy is by getting hold of the means sovereign countries can count on, like embassies and consulates.

http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/canada/article/837184–be-heard-the-bloc-quebecois-answers-your-questions

The Liberal Party

The federal government must do a better job screening and advising prospective immigrants on credential recognition before they leave their countries of origin. Improving credential recognition and the integration of new Canadians into the workforce requires a renewed effort between governments, professional groups, educational institutions, sector councils and unions. We will provide leadership and make this a priority.

http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/canada/article/837170–be-heard-the-liberal-party-answers-your-questions

The NDP

A New Democrat government would take a leadership role to move toward a fair, efficient, transparent and accountable immigration system.

Specifically, in conjunction with provinces and licensing authorities, we will accelerate and streamline the recognition of foreign credentials, overseas degrees and previous employment experience. To assist with literacy, community integration and English and French as a second language programs, we will reinstate federal funding for the settlement programs for new Canadians.

http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/canada/article/837147–be-heard-the-ndp-answers-your-questions

Canada’s lawyers broadening their horizons
Canadians are seeking opportunities for legal education in other countries — notably England, Australia and the United States.

Reuters Files

Canadians are seeking opportunities for legal education in other countries — notably England, Australia and the United States.

Vern Krishna, Financial Post · Wednesday, Feb. 9, 2011

What a difference a generation makes in the composition of the Canadian bar and the international competencies required of Canadian lawyers, who are broadening their horizons and becoming increasingly international in outlook and scope of work. More foreign-trained lawyers are immigrating into Canada; more Canadians are going to study abroad in foreign law schools; and law firms are looking at forging international partnerships in Europe and the Middle East.

Canadian law schools in the early 1970s were parochial institutions focused on provincial law. With a few notable exceptions, law students read foreign (English) texts and case law. Canada was a net importer of foreign-trained professors.

The Law Society of Upper Canada (LSUC) was the de facto arbiter of law school curricula, having first set academic standards in 1957 for the “approved LL. B.” degree, which all other law societies followed religiously so that their graduates could practise in Ontario. Provincial law societies were insular and protective of their territorial monopolies. The Supreme Court of Canada struck down admission barriers in three leading cases ( Andrews, Black and Mangat) on the right of “foreigners” to practise in Canada.

In Andrews, the Supreme Court struck down British Columbia’s requirement of Canadian citizenship as a condition to practise law in Canada. In Black, the Supreme Court ruled against Alberta’s restrictions on law firms trying to expand onto their provincial turf. In Mangat, the Law Society of British Columbia attempted to restrict individuals entitled to practise before federal tribunals. Each of these cases were attempts by law societies, under the guise of public protection, to protect their monopolistic power over licensing and, hence, protect their territorial turf.

Law societies must balance the interests of the public and ensure the competence of providers of legal services. However, the restrictive attitude of provincial law societies is entirely understandable. Monopolies increase the earnings of monopolists even though they are not necessarily in the best interests of the public. Monopolistic practices also increase the cost of legal services.

Prior to 1975, the provincial law societies would accept legal credentials only from the white commonwealth countries. Law schools were equally insular and even more elitist. Dalhousie Law School, for example, was aristocratic: it accepted foreign law degrees — provided they were from Oxford or Cambridge–and conferred a Canadian LL. B. on such graduates upon completion of only one additional year of studies.

Two principal factors account for the changes in legal education and the internationalization of Canadian lawyers. First, immigration patterns into Canada have changed and we now have an influx of lawyers from the United States and the non-white commonwealth.

Ontario was, once again, the reason for the second major change when it enacted the first Fair Access to Legal Professions Act. The statute requires LSUC to evaluate internationally trained professionals objectively and in a transparent manner that is defensible from judicial review. The law societies insisted on having some say in determining the academic qualifications of those who choose to be licensed as practitioners. The debate on appropriate academic content is animated, at times hostile, and epitomizes the clash of egos between the town and the gown.

As more foreign-trained lawyers are moving into Canada, we are also sending more Canadian students abroad. Canadian law schools have several joint degree programs with their American counterparts and are looking at exchanges with countries such as India, an area of increasing interest in international trade.

Also, as Canadians find it increasingly difficult to enter into Canadian law schools, they seek opportunities for legal education in other countries — notably England, Australia and the United States. Bond University Law Faculty, a superb private institution, in Australia, for example, is host to nearly 250 Canadians studying there who intend to return to Canada when they complete their education.

To be sure, the debate in the law societies on diversity is divisive and, characteristically, provincial. The new regulatory requirements that approved law degrees should ensure competence in specified areas of law is vague and as helpful as Lord Cockburn’s 1868 explanation that literature was criminally obscene if it tended to “deprave and corrupt,” a phrase about as illuminating in 2010 as it was 150 years ago.

However, regardless of regulatory edicts, which are generally dated by the time they are pronounced, the practice of Canadian law and the composition of the Canadian bar will be influenced more by global business than by profound statements on competencies.

vkrishna@blg.com – Professor Vern Krishna, CM, QC, FCGA, is Tax Counsel with Borden Ladner Gervais, LLP, and Executive Director of the CGA Tax Research Centre, University of Ottawa.

Read more: http://www.financialpost.com/news/Canada+lawyers+broadening+their+horizons/4247900/story.html#ixzz1DZLRf7GA

The University of Toronto is starting Ontario’s first bridging program for internationally trained lawyers, thanks in part to a $4 million investment in the program from the provincial government.

Every year, the Internationally Trained Lawyer Program will aim to help 100 lawyers who need accreditation to practice law in the province. Michael Chan, Ontario’s minister of citizenship and immigration, launched the program a ceremony last Tuesday.

More: Ranking Canada’s law schools

“We have tremendous international talent, a pool of talent here in Ontario for which we already have bridging programs, such as pharmacists, engineers and nurses, who are all internationally trained but are not currently in the job that they want,” said Chan. “Our economic prosperity depends on attracting skilled newcomers from around the world and retaining those people.”

The program will provide a range of services,  including provincial work experience, academic training, language support, career services and employment counselling. It’s set to operate out of U of T’s law faculty, and will be supported by groups including the Law Society of Upper Canada and the National Committee on Accreditation, in addition to local law firms.

For more information, click here.

The Federation’s final report recommends that law societies in common law jurisdictions establish a uniform educational requirement for entry to their bar admission programs or licensing processes. The requirement is expressed in terms of competencies in basic skills, awareness of appropriate ethical values and core legal knowledge that law students are expected to acquire during law school. The final report also sets out certain institutional requirements, such as prerequisites for entry and length of program, that law schools are expected to meet.

The Law Society will recommend to the Federation that the committee responsible for implementation include appropriate representation from Canadian law schools, and that law societies have an opportunity to approve the implementation committee’s recommendations. Full report.

The Fair Access to Regulated Professions Act

Foreign-trained Professionals Have Some Much-Needed Leverage.

July 28, 2009

Each year, thousands of foreign-trained skilled professionals come to Canada seeking a better life, bringing with them years of education and practical experience in their field of expertise. However, in many instances, they arrive here only to discover their foreign credentials will not be recognized by the professional associations responsible for issuing the certifications necessary to continue in their chosen profession. Without access to certification, many foreign-trained skilled professionals have no choice but to seek work in an alternative field, often performing manual or unskilled work, to support their families. In attempting to obtain certification, these skilled professionals often encounter frustration, needless bureaucracy, and closed doors.

In 2006, the Ontario Legislature enacted the Fair Access to Regulated Professions Act (“FARPA”), which requires professional associations in Ontario to provide registration practices for foreign-trained professionals that are “transparent, objective, impartial and fair.” By enacting this legislation, the government of Ontario has recognized that, in far too many instances, engineers, accountants, lawyers, doctors, teachers and other professionals who come from abroad face an unnecessarily difficult battle in obtaining certification to continue their chosen profession in Ontario. This is also true for professionals born in Canada who go abroad for university and then return, only to discover their foreign credentials are not readily recognized in Ontario.

Pursuant to FARPA, regulated professions must establish objective licensing requirements for foreign-trained applicants. In assessing an applicant’s foreign credentials, professional associations must do so in a way that is “transparent, objective, impartial, and fair.” Registration decisions must be made within a reasonable period of time, and the association must provide a written response to the applicant, providing written reasons for its decision. The professional association also must provide the right to an internal review or appeal of its decision within a reasonable period of time, and the applicant must be provided the right to present oral or written arguments in support of the appeal. FARPA further provides that an applicant has the right to access the professional association’s records that relate to the application.

If an association fails to abide by FARPA’s requirements, the Office of the Fairness Commissioner is authorized to issue an order to the association compelling it to comply with FARPA. If the association fails to comply with such an order, in addition to other legal remedies that might be available to the applicant, the association could be subject to a fine in an amount up to $100,000.

Take for example a recent immigrant who is a professional engineer in his home country with many years of work experience. When he applies for certification with the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario, the Association must assess his foreign credentials, including his educational background and work experience, based on criteria that are objective and fair. In other words, the Association must conduct a real assessment of his foreign credentials in light of criteria that have a real relationship to the same minimum requirements imposed on domestically trained applicants – the Association cannot impose greater or different standards on a foreign-trained applicant.

If the Association determines the applicant’s foreign credentials do not meet its criteria for licensing, the Association must provide in writing the basis for its decision, explaining how the criteria have not been met. However, it will not be sufficient to merely state what additional training or education is required. Rather, the Association must state why the additional training or education is required in light of its objective criteria. Moreover, the Association must provide the applicant with an opportunity to appeal and present oral and written arguments in response to the Association’s decision.

In this regard, FARPA can be an extremely effective tool in the hands of a foreign-trained professional. If the professional association has not established real objective criteria, cannot articulate the basis for its licensing decision, or cannot show it has acted fairly and impartially, the association will find itself in violation of FARPA. The applicant will then have a variety of potential remedies at its disposal, including seeking an order from the Office of the Fairness Commissioner and seeking enforcement of legal rights in court. Given that, the ultimate objective for every foreign-trained professional is to be treated fairly and impartially, requiring Ontario’s professional associations to comply with FARPA can go a long way in helping foreign-trained skilled professionals continue in their chosen fields and realize their dream of a better life.

Stephen J. Maddex is an associate in the Commercial Litigation Group in Ottawa. Before joining Lang Michener, he practiced with two large law firms in Houston, Texas, where he gained significant trial experience and appeared in courts all over the state. His practice focuses on U.S./Canada Cross-Border Litigation. For further information regarding FARPA, contact him directly at 613 232-7171 ext. 108 or smaddex@langmichener.ca.

Paul Dalby

The legal profession in Ontario is perhaps the last place you would expect initiatives to create a level playing field for newcomers, especially from other countries.

Nigerian lawyer Nicholas Owodunni found out just how tough when he arrived one year ago with his new wife, Elizabeth, a Canadian-trained social worker.

Owodunni, 39, had trained at the Obafemi Awolowo University and the Nigerian Law School before logging seven years of general law practice.

But he was not prepared for the maze of requirements and regulations that sat between him and a law career in Ontario.

“The actual problem I had was in getting my accreditation,” he says. “I had to call back to Nigeria to get actual transcripts from law school and the university.” That took a lot of time.

Now, Owodunni must write nine exams, each costing $525 before he can search for an articling job.

Meanwhile, he has obtained his licence as a financial adviser, but he is determined to return to law.

Internationally trained lawyers following in Owodunni’s footsteps might have an easier time in the future, thanks to new plans being rolled out in the halls of Toronto’s world of law.

The first is a pilot project that seeks to bridge the gap for newcomers from overseas, which is being launched by one of the country’s pre-eminent law firms, Fraser Milner Casgrain (FMC).

Deadline for applications to the six-month paid internship program at FMC closed earlier this month and the first candidates will arrive at the Toronto law firm in early February.

The internship will break down the mysteries of the law culture in Canada and give candidates work experience to put on their resumés and provide contacts in the profession.

Those assets are considered essential to nailing down the all-important articling job that launches law careers in Canada.

Meanwhile, the University of Toronto Faculty of Law has submitted a proposal to the Ontario government for an end-to-end bridging program to help ease internationally trained lawyers into the Canadian system.

“While FMC’s work is fantastic, we need more,” says Jane Price, faculty director of professional diversity and legal opportunities. “If we get government funds, we will use FMC’s internship as a pilot to try and get other people to follow suit.”

The U of T proposal would provide international lawyers with job skills training, courses on cultural fluency, academic courses and a job placement.

Price says the decks are currently stacked against internationally trained lawyers. “Their barriers are really enormous, and I think people are recognizing we are not doing a fantastic job here.”