LSO Paralegal Scope of Practice Expansion

Comments & Recommendations

For the reasons that follow, the OBA suggests that before an expansion of paralegal’s scope of activities as outlined in the proposal is implemented, there needs to be an analysis of outcomes and data from the FLSP program and a new consultation that includes this data as well as specifics about the proposed training program, and the proposed areas of expansion.

Complexity of Appeals and Judicial Reviews Requires Advanced Legal Training

Appeals and judicial reviews are a complex area of law distinct from initial hearings. At initial hearings, the focus is on presenting facts. At the appellate and judicial review level, representatives must interpret legal precedents, argue issues of law, engage in complicated legal analysis and research, maintain an up-to-date understanding of the ever-changing landscape of administrative law, and navigate highly specialized procedural requirements. This includes complex standard of review analysis, which continues to garner further appellate court attention including at the Supreme Court of Canada. The preparation and presentation of these matters require extensive legal training that is currently part of a lawyer’s education and practice. These complexities are not part of the paralegal college curriculum and cannot be replicated with a short training program. Even within the bar, it is common to have trial lawyers who do not work on appeals and refer clients to an appellate specialized lawyer. While some lawyers do both – this is a recognition of the unique level of complexity and knowledge associated with appellate work (and JRs broadly) applicable to all legal service providers, not just paralegals. This evidences a tension in one of the justifications in the proposal,

Appeals and judicial reviews are not part of the paralegal college curriculum. The proposal suggests that a training course should be developed in advance of an expansion of the paralegal scope of activities. There are no details on what this course would entail, how long it would be, what topics would be covered, or if there would be a shadowing or mentorship component. This information should be included in the consultation before a decision is made. It will be difficult or impossible to replicate the years of legal education and professional development that lawyers undertake in order to adequately represent clients in these complex matters. Appeals depend heavily on identifying appealable errors – a skill honed through years of legal education and practice, not short-term training modules.

Access Versus Adequacy & Public Confidence

Clients may not appreciate the distinction between lawyer and paralegal representation and may inadvertently face risks in the outcome of their cases. The additional leniency and assistance that courts give to self-represented litigants, as mandated by the Supreme Court of Canada, would be eliminated if an individual has a legal representative. Given that appeals and judicial reviews are not part of the paralegal college curriculum, and in that paralegals do not have the experience and training in this complex area, there is a concern that clients may not receive adequate representation and that this change could lead to confusion among the public regarding the quality and capabilities of legal professionals, eroding the distinction between lawyers and paralegals. This puts the LSO at risk of failing to meet its statutory obligation to regulate in the public interest and to protect the public by ensuring legal service providers meet the appropriate standards of competence. Increased access to justice must be achieved without the risk of compromising legal quality.

The expanded scope of practice for paralegals through the FLSP program is new. The required 4-month course through Fanshawe College is currently accepting applicants for September 2025. This is a new development that has not had adequate time or data to evaluate this proposal. Data needs to be collected and shared on the adequacy of representation, the frequency of negligence claims, the uptake in representation and other key markers.

The FLSP program needs a careful, evidence-based evaluation of its outcomes, which must precede any further scope of practice extensions. The LSO and the profession cannot make informed decisions on the success and challenges of scope expansion without data. Before considering additional scope expansions, there needs to be longitudinal data showing that previous expansions have improved legal outcomes without compromising quality.

The Scope of the Proposed Expansion Should be Tailored

Finally, in our view, a proposed expansion of this kind should be more targeted as to the tribunals to which it applies. An expansion into certain tribunals, like the Landlord and Tenant Board, are less concerning than an expansion into tribunals that require highly specialized knowledge, like the Health Professional Appeal and Review Board, for example. There are less concerns with paralegals potentially acting on Small Claims Court appeals. We note the pending increase to the Small Claims Court monetary threshold to $50,000, which takes effect October 2025, meaning that more matters will fall within the Small Claims Court jurisdiction, and the monetary figures involved are more significant.