We’ve been very worried about steps taken by the BC Government to eliminate justice. As lawyers we find this particularly abhorrent because our justice system is the source of the freedoms we enjoy and the collective understanding we have about the rights of individuals in a democracy.
Hard work is simply that, and not every lawyer is capable of doing the work at the level we need while also being creative.
There may be no point in fighting the elimination of justice. Over the last 5 year we’ve seen similar steps taken by the Conservatives in Ottawa and in a number of other provinces. It may be futile, but in our office we’ve resolved to stand up to this trend and call it out wherever we see it. Our job is to protect justice and our clients.
This comes with a cost. We work evenings and weekends, and we personally provide financial backing to take on these challenges. About 30 months ago we began to realize that the battles we were taking on were too much for us to handle without more boots on the ground. What we needed were more great lawyers who had the insight to see the trends we’d identified along with others. We needed people with the courage to be iconoclasts – people who were willing to speak out. And so we started a quiet recruitment campaign for more great lawyers.
The glamour of 12 hour days
Finding more great lawyers isn’t as easy as you might think. Many lawyers contact us hoping to get a job at Acumen Law, mainly because of our public presence. From the outside, working at Acumen Law may seem glamorous. There is public recognition for our lawyers’ work and reporters want our opinions, but any fame pales in comparison to the massive amount of drudgery legal work that we do day to day to get the best results for our clients.
Hard work is simply that, and not every lawyer is capable of doing the work at the level we need while also being creative. So we need to find the right people whenever we think of expanding our team.
Great Lawyers: Roy Ho
Roy Ho came to us recommended by a lawyer in another Vancouver law firm who supports our resistant stance. When we met Roy in the summer of 2013 he had just completed law school and was ready to start articling. What stuck out with Roy was his unwillingness to accept at face value anything that the BC Government said. He knew what it was like to be jerked around by the Government.
Roy isn’t an angry guy and it was clear to us that he approached problems with objectivity. Nevertheless, he has this tendency to always ask the next question. In other words, he keeps digging. It’s in his nature.
We like this. In our view an essential attribute of great lawyers is that they know the question to ask, that they’ve already anticipated the answer to that question, and they have already formulated the next question. It was clear to us that Roy did this as part of his nature.
If you want to see an example of this in action, watch the IRP hearing at the Supreme Court of Canada starting at approximately 250:30. You’ll see Justice Moldaver question a Government lawyer following this particular pattern.
We made Roy part of the A-Team because we knew he’d fit. And we had a problem. And ICBC had a bigger messy problem.
Messy problem at ICBC
Nobody considered the insurance implications of the IRP scheme when the Government introduced the law. You see, before the IRP scheme came into effect, reliable breath samples were obtained in most DUI accident cases using an evidentiary breathalyzer (A.K.A an Approved Instrument). After the IRP scheme came into effect, most accident cases in which alcohol was a probable factor would end with an IRP.
With an IRP there is no reliable evidence that the insurance arm of ICBC could rely on to say whether alcohol was a factor in an accident. If a driver is tested and found to have over 180 mg in 100 ml of blood, there is little doubt in most cases that alcohol was a factor. But what about with an IRP? If the police only use a roadside screener, is there any way to say that any particular accident was alcohol related?
ASD roadside screeners do not provide a numerical result over .059mg% so there is no way to say anything aside from a range with respect to the blood-alcohol concentration of any driver if the investigation ended with an IRP.
For the insurance arm of ICBC this is a nightmare. If an IRP is issued they are in an absolute quandary regarding whether they are obligated to protect the driver by providing insurance. They no longer have the evidence to say whether a driver was in breach of their insurance conditions. It’s a messy problem for ICBC.
To laugh at Government incompetence
We had to laugh when we realized that the Government hadn’t considered the insurance implications of IRPs. When we brought it to the attention of supervisors at ICBC back in 2010, we were met with silence. They didn’t have a clue what to do. The adjusters we normally dealt with told us that nobody had considered the implications of IRPs for ICBC insurance.
We thought about it. We had a lot of cases where our clients were in an accident and they received an IRP. There was no way in law to say that alcohol was a factor in the accident. And we wanted to ensure that ICBC paid out the claim if they were required to in law.
Great lawyers for a certain type of case
When it comes to IRPs, the numbers show that we succeed in more cases than any other law firm. We’re great IRP lawyers. And of course, because we defend IRPs we’re in a pretty good position to deal with ICBC. The problem we found, however, was that the knowledge base required to deal with the ICBC insurance aspect of a DUI case was so intricate that learning it was a distraction from our core goal to succeed defending IRPs and challenging the flawed law.
And then in walked Roy Ho.
Roy joined the Acumen team and we trained him with all we knew about dealing with ICBC claims with an emphasis on cases where ICBC may look to deny coverage. And we taught him how to prosecute ICBC injury claims because often our clients can sue and collect for the damage and injury. And we told him to learn more because from what we could see no BC lawyers seemed interested in dealing with ICBC accident cases when alcohol was a suspected factor.
Roy’s two year anniversary with Acumen Law
Roy articled with Paul and was called to the bar. Now we are approaching his 2-year anniversary with Acumen Law. Kyla started about 5 years ago. Each of them were originally hired as articled students. Like Roy, Kyla completed her legal training with Paul.
We’ve created a powerful team of great lawyers. And we remain true to our principles that our goals are to serve our clients and justice.
Roy accomplishes this by quietly ensuring that our clients are not denied insurance simply because they were issued an IRP. Three cheers for Roy!