 |
August 22 , 2022
First Steps in Problem Solving |
July 28 , 2022
Checklist of Powerful Procedural Principles |
March 22 , 2022
Repeating a Cross-Examination Question
|
January 25 , 2022
Enforcing Land Sales Becomes Easier |
January 5 , 2022
Proving a Settlement After a Mediation
|
November 16, 2021
Types of Injunctions
|
October 1, 2021
Orders After Litigation is Over
|
August 11, 2021
Discoverability for Limitation Periods
|
August 5 , 2021
Releases of Claims
|
June 7 , 2021
Language Used Still Matters
|
May 17 , 2021
Serving Uncooperative People
|
April 15 , 2021
Death and After-Life of Contingency Agreements
|
February 22 , 2021
Legal Analysis
|
February 2 , 2021
Costs Clarified at Last
|
January 4 , 2021
Urgent!
|
December 10, 2020
Traps and Confusion in Service Times
|
November 24, 2020
Don't Cut Corners
|
October 2 , 2020
Consent Orders
|
August 4 , 2020
Electronic Hearings
|
July 21, 2020
Ceasing to Act
|
June 29, 2020
Writing Skills
|
June 29, 2020
Keeping Up With the Law
|
June 22, 2020
Assets as a Test for Security for Costs
|
June 19, 2020
What is This Case About?
|
June 11, 2020
Cross-Examining Child Witnesses
|
May 20 , 2020
Formal Offers
|
May 13 , 2020
Vexatious or Self-Represented Litigants
|
January 7, 2020
G.S.T. and Costs
|
December 20 , 2019
Electronically Navigating the
Handbook
|
October 7 , 2019
Questioning is a Bad Word
|
July 29 , 2019
Dismissal for Delay
|
May 7 , 2019
Rule 4.31 Fallacies
|
March 18 , 2019
More Dangers in Oral Fee Agreements
|
February 11 , 2019
Weir-Jones Decisions
|
January 9 , 2019
Discouraging Settlements
|
November 30, 2018
European Court Helps You Twice?
|
November 23 , 2018
Courts Overruling Tribunals
|
November 16 , 2018
New Evidence on Appeal
|
October 30 , 2018
Schedule C's Role
|
July 17 , 2018
Loopholes in Enforcing Settlements
|
|
May 7 , 2018
Enforcement of Procedure Rules
April 16, 2018
Limping Lawsuits are Often
Doomed
April 3 , 2018
Court of Appeal Tips for
Summary Decisions
March 19, 2018
Serious Dangers in Chambers
Applications
February 13 , 2018
Court Backlog
December 18 , 2017
Lowering the Status of Courts
September 15 , 2017
Access to Court Decisions
July 4 , 2017
Strictissimi Juris
June 14 , 2017
Why Don't Your Clients Settle?
June 5 , 2017
Gap in Rules About Parties
June 5, 2017
Personal Costs Against
Solicitors
April 26, 2017
Clogged Courts
April 11, 2017
Dismissal for Want of
Prosecution
January 6, 2017
Incomplete Disclosure
December 15, 2016
Mediation
November 23, 2016
Is Contract Interpretation Law? |
|
|
Welcome
Côté’s Commentaries
© J.E. Côté 2016-2022
|
FIRST STEPS IN PROBLEM SOLVING
|
Lawyers should learn how the legal community approaches problems differently than do business or government.
150 years ago, if you found that you were riding a dead horse, the same solution was commonly accepted by almost everyone. 2022 has a more sophisticated technological approach, illustrating 3 diverging philosophies and types of working methods for this problem. Some examples follow.
A. Solutions from Large Business Client
- Point out that that is the way this big respected company has always ridden this horse.
- Set up a committee to study the horse.
- Claim a capital loss, and amend upwards the horse's adjusted cost base.
- Promote the horse to a supervisory post.
- Study what effects live and dead horses have on the environment.
- Contract out riding the horse.
- Harness together several dead horses.
- Get government funding to electrify or power by solar panels this horse, or to hire temporary horses in the summer vacation.
- Hire quality officers to improve the dead horse, or marketing consultants to find novel uses for dead horses.
- Visit other countries to see how they ride dead horses.
- Increase staff training to boost their riding ability.
B. Solutions from Government or Military Departments or Organizations
- Amend the rider's job description.
- Amend the horse's job description.
- Spend the year's budget for hay and feed before the end of the fiscal year.
- Transfer the horse to another department
- Hide the death of the horse.
- Remove all records that the horse existed.
- Court-martial the rider
- Give the horse an official written warning.
C. Solutions from Courts and Law Offices
- Define the term "horse" narrowly
- Sue to declare the horse's death a nullity, preferably a Charter breach
- Sue the horse's parents
- Define broadly "death benefits" under the Canada Pension Plan
- Point out that the present state of the horse's health is a matter for individual discretionary or professional judgment in the particular circumstances of each case, to which deference is owed.
- In the insurance policy, define "employee" and "disabled" broadly.
- Search for some conflict of interest by the rider.
D. Solutions from Municipal Governments
All of the above.
– Hon. J.E. Côté
|
|
The Commentaries are intended to call the attention of lawyers to promising or threatening developments in the law, in civil procedure, in developing their skills, or simply to describe something curious, funny or intriguing.
Justice Côté recently retired from the Court of Appeal of Alberta and currently acts as an arbitrator, mediator, or referee under Rules 6.44 and 6.45 of the Alberta Rules of Court.
He may be contacted through Juriliber at email: info@juriliber.com or phone 780-424-5345.
|
|