Sentences with phrase «discussion of alternative business structures»
OTLA has published a submission to the Law Society of Upper Canada in response to the discussion of Alternative Business Structures.
http://otlablog.com/ Not exact matches
This discussion, of course, included alternative business structures in the practice of law, i.e.: non-lawyer ownership of firms.
See LSUC's «Alternative Business Structures» webpage, from which its ABS Discussion Paper of September 24, 2014, can be downloaded (pdf).
See: «What a Law Society Should Be — A Response to the Law Society of Upper Canada's Alternative Business Structures Discussion Paper of September 24, 2014» (pdf).
As an exception to the universally accepted view that law society committees are «all form and no substance» in regard to the «unaffordable legal services problem» («the problem»), there is one Law Society of Upper Canada (LSUC) committee that has produced a Discussion Paper that has great substance, although some ingrates are so inconsiderate as to say that it's not «the right stuff»; see: Alternative Business Structures and the Legal Profession in Ontario: A Discussion Paper.
The Law Society of Upper Canada's (LSUC's) «alternative business structures» proposal (the ABS proposal in its Discussion Paper)[i] will bring about a critically important and worrying change to the practice of law in Canada.
See: «What a Law Society Should Be-A Response to the Law Society of Upper Canada's Alternative Business Structures Discussion Paper of September 24, 2014.»
[12] For a general discussion of risk in the context of law firms, see Edward M. Iacobucci and Michael J. Trebilcock, «An Economic Analysis of Alternative Business Structures for the Practice of Law,» (paper presented at the Law Society of Upper Canada's symposium for the Alternative Business Structures, October 4, 2013), http://www.lsuc.on.ca/uploadedFiles/ABS-report-Iacobucci-Trebilcock-september-2014.pdf.
There is plenty of discussion about the future of the profession, including the CBA Futures Report and debates over Alternative Business Structures (ABS).
It mentioned entity regulation just once more — in its December, 2015 Informational Report to the House of Delegates, in a list of the Commission's ongoing work, it included a reference to «Ongoing discussion and study of additional regulatory opportunities, including but not limited to alternative business structures and entity regulation.»
For example, LSUC ignores the problem and its duties as set out in s. 4.2 of the (Ontario) Law Society Act, while «fast - tracking» the Alternative Business Structures issue (ABS issue) to the quick creation of: (1) an ABS Committee (2) a (biased) ABS Discussion Paper written by the Committee; (3) the online publication of the responses thus obtained; (4) the online publication of a summary of those responses — all done by the work of those self - interested benchers who have campaigned hard to have ABSs made legal; and (5) a proposed vote in 2016 to determine the law society's position as to making ABSs legal.
For my analysis, see: «What a Law Society Should Be — A Response to the Law Society of Upper Canada's Alternative Business Structures Discussion Paper of September 24, 2014» (pdf).
For a summary of the responses to the ABS Discussion Paper, see the «Alternative Business Structures Working Group Report» at Tab 8.2 of the Report to Convocation, (pdf) February 26, 2015, of LSUC's Professional Regulation Committee.