A BC judge is allowing the transitional process of the Legal Professions Act (2024) to proceed, but has ruled future injunctions against the act are still possible.The act was passed May 16 and creates a new single regulator of legal professions in British Columbia called the Legal Professions of British Columbia. The LPBC would regulate lawyers, notaries public, and certain paralegals practicing in the province, and new classes of government-created legal professionals that may be created and governed by Cabinet regulation.The Law Society of British Columbia, the Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia (TLABC) and Kevin Westell applied in court for parts of the act to be suspended and prevented from coming into force until the courts could sort out their constitutionality. They argued such changes would end self-governance and self-regulation of lawyers and compromise their independence from government.On Thursday, Justice Gropper of the Supreme Court of British Columbia refused the applicants’ injunction and left the transitional process to enact the law to be made in good faith. The transitional provisions establish a transitional board, transitional indigenous council, and advisory committee.Gropper’s decision is focused on the transitional provisions of this Act, not the substantive provisions, which are the sections that would bring the act fully into force.“I further find that it is premature to enjoin the substantive provisions of the legislation…I also accept the transitional planning process must be completed first and that it may influence the substantive provisions that do come into effect,” Gropper wrote in his decision.“The Province can amend the Act to conform with any constitutional problems that the court may find after a factual basis is established by the transitional planning process.”Gropper said if after that takes place, the plaintiffs have the “right to reapply if there is a material change in circumstances and it becomes realistic that the LGIC [Lieutenant Governor in Council] may bring the substantive provisions into force in the near future.”TLABC President Michael Elliott responded to the decision in a statement.“The court has sent a strong message today: all parties, particularly the Province, need to work together in good faith on the substantive issues during this transitional phase. The court highlights that even the Province itself has admitted in court that parts of the Legal Professions Act (2024) are potentially unconstitutional and may need to be amended. TLABC expects the Province to act accordingly and in good faith,” Elliott said.“The decision today was clear: if the Province tries to rush the Legal Professions Act (2024) into force, without substantive amendments to address what we maintain are the unconstitutional sections of the Bill, they risk ending up back in court.”Elliott added that “TLABC remains ready to challenge the constitutionality of the Act in the primary application, and committed to protecting the rights of individuals, enhance access to justice, and preserve the integrity and independence of the legal system. We will continue to advocate for an independent and self-regulated bar and judiciary and challenge any legislation, like this Act, that threatens these principles”.
A BC judge is allowing the transitional process of the Legal Professions Act (2024) to proceed, but has ruled future injunctions against the act are still possible.The act was passed May 16 and creates a new single regulator of legal professions in British Columbia called the Legal Professions of British Columbia. The LPBC would regulate lawyers, notaries public, and certain paralegals practicing in the province, and new classes of government-created legal professionals that may be created and governed by Cabinet regulation.The Law Society of British Columbia, the Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia (TLABC) and Kevin Westell applied in court for parts of the act to be suspended and prevented from coming into force until the courts could sort out their constitutionality. They argued such changes would end self-governance and self-regulation of lawyers and compromise their independence from government.On Thursday, Justice Gropper of the Supreme Court of British Columbia refused the applicants’ injunction and left the transitional process to enact the law to be made in good faith. The transitional provisions establish a transitional board, transitional indigenous council, and advisory committee.Gropper’s decision is focused on the transitional provisions of this Act, not the substantive provisions, which are the sections that would bring the act fully into force.“I further find that it is premature to enjoin the substantive provisions of the legislation…I also accept the transitional planning process must be completed first and that it may influence the substantive provisions that do come into effect,” Gropper wrote in his decision.“The Province can amend the Act to conform with any constitutional problems that the court may find after a factual basis is established by the transitional planning process.”Gropper said if after that takes place, the plaintiffs have the “right to reapply if there is a material change in circumstances and it becomes realistic that the LGIC [Lieutenant Governor in Council] may bring the substantive provisions into force in the near future.”TLABC President Michael Elliott responded to the decision in a statement.“The court has sent a strong message today: all parties, particularly the Province, need to work together in good faith on the substantive issues during this transitional phase. The court highlights that even the Province itself has admitted in court that parts of the Legal Professions Act (2024) are potentially unconstitutional and may need to be amended. TLABC expects the Province to act accordingly and in good faith,” Elliott said.“The decision today was clear: if the Province tries to rush the Legal Professions Act (2024) into force, without substantive amendments to address what we maintain are the unconstitutional sections of the Bill, they risk ending up back in court.”Elliott added that “TLABC remains ready to challenge the constitutionality of the Act in the primary application, and committed to protecting the rights of individuals, enhance access to justice, and preserve the integrity and independence of the legal system. We will continue to advocate for an independent and self-regulated bar and judiciary and challenge any legislation, like this Act, that threatens these principles”.
