The Gazette 1964/67

with the case on the basis of the relevant facts only and dismiss the irrelevant from his mind. Likewise, he finds it extremely difficult to take a detached view of the facts and make decisions and give opinions unpopular to his client. In the smaller firms it is unusual to find lawyers with good court technique and because of inex perience in court work, the average lawyer has to be concerned with too many incidental details such as rules of evidence, procedure and so on and his attention from the issues is distracted. Also, the lawyer who infrequently appears in court will not do his client's case full justice because of his relative inability at examination and cross- examination of witnesses. Advantages and Disadvantages to Client in Non- Litigious Matters and Lower Court Proceedings I do not think that any real difference exists between the two systems so far as non-litigious matters are concerned except in the matter of cost. In the fused profession, the lawyer is first a solici tor and, with the exception of a specialist, most lawyers are as competent as Irish solicitors to carry on a general practice. Again, the problem arises in matters requiring specialist skill which are outisde the competence of the general practitioner, for he does not have the choice of highly skilled experts as are available in the Bar Library in Ireland to advise and guide him. In proceedings in the lower courts, the client is probably given better service in Canada than is generally available to him in Ireland. For the average Canadian lawyer, because of his training in law school and his experience in practise, is more competent in this field than the average solicitor in this country. There are, of course, many very competent solicitors practising in the District and Circuit Courts and on the other hand many Canadian lawyers never set foot in a court, although they call themselves barristers, so my comments are only intended to apply to the general situation. Advantages and Disadvantages of Fusion to Lawyers The principal advantage to lawyers resulting from fusion is the substantially higher earning power of a large firm. The trend in North America is towards large partnerships and, as a result, there is a wide range of specialist service in all or many branches of the law. Allied to this, one firm can earn all the fees payable by a client in respect 100

One of the effects of fusion of the professions in Ireland would be to substantially increase the income of the larger and efficient city firms whose services would be sought by industry, wealthy clients and so on. On the other hand, the one man firm or small partnership would have to try and cope with all branches of the Law and the attractions of large partnerships would tend to reduce the number of such small firms to the great detriment of the less wealthy class of clients. In Canada, I practised for almost eight years in what was considered a small firm as the number of lawyers engaged in it were four or five over the period. Prior to that I spent two years as legal adviser to a Government Department. I think I realise both the advantages and disadvantages of the united profession and will try and set them down. Advantage to Client in Superior Court Proceedings In the smaller firms where there is not special isation, the client selects his own lawyer who con ducts all interviews with the client and witnesses and who handles the correspondence, all prelim inary proceedings, motions, examinations for dis covery and the trial. The client, if he had confi- cence in his lawyer, knows that all the facts of his case can be considered and put to the Court. On the other hand, in a larger firm where there is specialisation, the client may be interviewed by one lawyer and perhaps have the initial stages of his case dealt with by him and Court proceedings dealt with by another who acts as counsel for the firm. In either event, the client has only one fee to pay. Disadvantages to Client in Superior Court Proceedings A person tends to consult his own lawyer no matter what type of proceedings are contemplated or he makes a selection of lawyer on the basis of reputation or recommendation and he may have his case dealt with by someone inexperienced or with little ability for the type of work involved. In the case of the firm with its own counsel this situation occurs, for it is unlikely that any one counsel is equally expert in such diverse matters as will suits, paternity suits, admiralty law or running down actions. il: Where the one man acts as solicitor and counsel • (and the two functions are acknowledged in Canada) it is extremely difficult for him to deal