Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site lsuc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!dave
From: dave@lsuc.UUCP (David Sherman)
Newsgroups: net.legal
Subject: Re: Will Stroh get escape with wallet in
Message-ID: <411@lsuc.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 14-Feb-85 21:25:59 EST
Article-I.D.: lsuc.411
Posted: Thu Feb 14 21:25:59 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 14-Feb-85 22:11:41 EST
References: <1240@akgua.UUCP> <39400004@uiucdcs.UUCP>
Reply-To: dave@lsuc.UUCP (David Sherman)
Organization: Law Society of Upper Canada, Toronto
Lines: 23

In article <39400004@uiucdcs.UUCP> renner@uiucdcs.UUCP writes:
||The problem is that the plaintiffs can't lose, no matter how ridiculous
||their suit.  I think this needs to be changed.  I think that people filing
||suits of no merit should be liable for damages. 

Not damages, but costs. The Canadian system is far superior to the
U.S. in this regard, in my opinion. In any suit, the winner is
normally awarded "party-and-party" costs (comes to something around
1/2 or real costs); if the court finds that a suit (or defense)
was frivolous, it can award "solicitor-and-client" costs, which
are (roughly) the actual legal fees. Costs are always in the
discretion of the court, however; there have been cases where
the [technical] winner of a case has had costs awarded against him.

And whether contingency fees should be allowed at all is another
question, of course. They're illegal in Ontario.

Dave Sherman
The Law Society of Upper Canada
Toronto
-- 
{utzoo pesnta nrcaero utcs}!lsuc!dave
{allegra decvax ihnp4 linus}!utcsrgv!lsuc!dave