Sentences with phrase «of unaffordable legal services»

This is the wrong approach to the «access to justice problem of unaffordable legal services,» because:

Law societies are the cause of the unaffordable legal services problem.

The Committee's Report makes no reference to the impact of the unaffordable legal services problem upon the court system and its unacceptable levels of delay.

Therefore, the failure of law societies to take action against a problem the size and duration of unaffordable legal services, justifies government intervention under the federal government's «trade and commerce» power of s. 91 of The Constitution Act, 1867.

The «burning bush» question in our law schools today is, why don't our law societies free our people from this land of unaffordable legal services, and our courts from self - represented litigants?

Law society efforts and access to justice committees have been in effect for several years now, but the victims of unaffordable legal services continue to grow in size and number.

To best serve self - represented litigants (SRL's): (1) define the problem of unaffordable legal services accurately; (2) determine the exact cause of the problem; and then, (3) devise a feasible, effective solution.

Otherwise, it feeds itself from the consequences of law society neglect of the unaffordable legal services problem, with its power, prestige and national scope based upon the continued existence of that problem.

Obfuscation of law society responsibility for affordability as the cause of the unaffordable legal services problem?

Apps can not cure the problem of unaffordable legal services.

As a result, the A2J problem of unaffordable legal services is inevitable because law firms do not have the necessary high degree of specialization and volume of production that produce the economies - of - scale necessary to maintain legal services as affordable.

Right now, they have nothing of that nature — no program the purpose of which is to solve the problem of unaffordable legal services.

Therefore, because of the access to justice problem of unaffordable legal services, shouldn't there be an expanded constitutional «right to counsel» in criminal cases?

All efforts are aimed at helping the population learn to live with the problem of unaffordable legal services, but there are none to solve the problem.

Lawyers remain the passive victims of the benchers [1] that we ourselves elected to be the law societies» managers, instead of demanding that they get busy solving the problem of unaffordable legal services («the problem»).

Who stands to lose nothing to this access to justice problem of unaffordable legal services?

Nowhere in their published declarations as to their alleged devotion to the public interest and to the undeclared constitutional principle of the independence of law societies from the rule of law, do they say that the «access to justice problem of unaffordable legal services» is their problem and their duty to solve it.

So: threaten law societies that if they don't get competent to solve the problem of unaffordable legal services, then we must petition government to abolish law societies which would be the best thing that could be done for the population, the justice system, and the legal profession itself.

If ABSs in any form are legalized (as LSUC legalized the so - called «charity ABSs» at its September meeting last month), then all such producers should be allowed to similarly bring relief to the problem of unaffordable legal services, including the commercial producers, and all forms of ABSs.

And so, the only way that the problem of unaffordable legal services will be solved is by way of government programs for socialized law.

That issue must be considered in the present context that our law societies have no program the purpose of which is to SOLVE the problem of unaffordable legal services, as distinguished from the «alternative legal services» programs, which merely help the population learn to LIVE WITH the problem.

«Decisions concerning: (1) the problem of unaffordable legal services and its consequences to the population; (2) the great power of instant and wide - spread communications provided by the internet, the social media, and the news media in dealing with those consequences; (3) the self - regulation debate; and, (4) all matters as significant as the regulation of the provision of legal services by other professions, should each be considered as to their impact upon the other three.

But, if CanLII could provide the services that LAO LAW does, nationally, it would have a substantial impact on the problem of unaffordable legal services, if not solve it.

So, to reap the harvest of the great volume of new legal work that technology will bring the legal profession, it must first solve the problem of unaffordable legal services.

The cause of unaffordable legal services is the lack of innovation in the method of providing legal services.

Were the present situation otherwise, the problem of unaffordable legal services would not exist, nor would the NSRLP be content to feed off the present situation.

But the problem of unaffordable legal services is caused by the high cost of legal advice services, not by routine legal services such as simple real estate deals, divorces, and incorporations.

Such «alternative legal services» programs (such as unbundled legal services projects) help the population live with the problem of unaffordable legal services, but they do nothing to help solve the problem.