By Julius Melnitzer | November 11, 2021
IVANHOé CAMBRIDGE IN-HOUSE LAWYERS MOVE TO BLG
“In-house” gets new meaning as part of Ivanhoé Cambridge’s (IC) law department moves to Borden Ladner Gervais LLP offices in Montreal and Toronto. All this pursuant to an agreement for BLG to manage legal services for shopping centres owned by IC, a longstanding client. The IC lawyers will continue to provide exclusive services for their portfolio, but will do so under the aegis of BLG Beyond Leasing, part of the firm’s “BLG Beyond” alternative legal services platform. In a press release, BLG said that the arrangements will “go beyond the traditional provision of legal services”, “will offer an exclusive service to [IC]”, and use “streamlined commercial leasing management and integrated services” to support shopping centre operations.
Related Article: Will COVID turn lawyers from Luddites to leaders?
Senior counsel no better than juniors?
QCs win just 55 percent of cases in the UK when matched against more junior lawyers, according to an analysis by Solomonic, as reported in The Law Society Gazette. The greybeards did even worse in summary judgment matters, winning only 51 percent of the time. Their forte, however, appeared to be in “jurisdiction applications”, where their success rate soared to 73 percent. Solomonic’s managing partner opined that clients tend to retain QCs for tougher cases that skew their record. Sound lame to anyone?
Related Article: The Advocacy Club: a special place for junior advocates
AUSTRALIA PROPOSES CAP TO LITIGATION FUNDERS’ PROFITS
Australia, one of the few jurisdictions to regulate and license litigation funders, has proposed that fees not be allowed to exceed 30 percent of the gross proceeds of class actions. According to the The Law Society Gazette, the proposal permits courts to approve or vary the funding arrangements on the basis of independent expert evidence at the funders’ expense.
Related Article: Litigation funders launch $10 billion worldwide group
judges owed duty of care
The UK government has conceded that ministers and the senior judiciary owe judges a duty of care to provide a safe place of work. The concession, according to The Law Society Gazette, came in a lawsuit brought by a Crown court judge who sued the Ministry of Justice, the lord chancellor and the lord chief justice. Kaly Kaul claimed that senior members of the judiciary failed to support her and bullied her after she complained about barristers’ behaviour in a lengthy trial.
CAN’T MISS LAW FIRM BULLETINS
Capital Markets: Osler Hoskin, Report: 2021 Diversity Disclosure Practices – – – Diversity and leadership at Canadian public companies
Construction Law: McMillan, Vaccination Mandates in the Construction Industry – – – What You Need to Know
Employment Law: Mathews Dinsdale, Ontario Arbitrator Upholds Employer’s Mandatory Vaccination Policy
Financial Services: Torys, Canadian Fintech Review
Intellectual Property: Smart & Biggar, Update on biosimilars in Canada – – – October 2021
Privacy Law: McCarthy Tétrault, Bill 64 Blog Series
Julius Melnitzer is a Toronto-based legal affairs writer, ghostwriter, writing coach and media trainer. Readers can reach him at firstname.lastname@example.org or https://legalwriter.net/contact.