Immigration Law for Ontario Paralegals-Litigation

As you are aware, Tony Caruso (Paralegal) has been fighting to bring the scope of immigration to the paralegal profession for 7 years. The federal government has already paved the way for paralegals to practice immigration which includes immigration applications and Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) proceedings. The Federal Government amended section 91 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) on June 30th, 2011, allowing paralegals the full scope to provide immigration services excluding any proceedings before the federal court. This was affirmed and recognized as being so by Justice J. Morgan in the matter of Law Society of Ontario v Timothy Edward Leahy, 2018 ONSC 4722 by referencing Section 91 (2) of “IRPA”.

Tony Caruso has hired a prestigious law firm in Toronto to take on this important matter before Superior Court. Tony Caruso has already invested significant money into the legal challenge; however, such a fight requires continued investment. Because this fight is every paralegal’s fight, it is paramount that the paralegal community assist in the investment for the profession’s future. It is with this fact that the paralegal community is asked to donate for this worthy cause.

The College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants (CICC) is the new national regulatory body that promotes and protects the public interest by overseeing regulated immigration and citizenship consultants and international student advisors.

The CICC’s current federal mandate stems from the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) and the Citizenship Act which require anyone providing Canadian immigration or citizenship advice or representation for a fee or other consideration, to be a member in good standing of CICC, a Canadian law society or the Chambre des notaires du Québec.

Individuals providing Canadian immigration/citizenship services abroad are subject to Canadian law even if they reside outside of Canada.

The Ontario Government made their intentions clear in 2007 by amending the Law Society Act to regulate Paralegals in Ontario; recognizing paralegals having an important role to play in providing access to justice.

The Law Society Act of Ontario was also amended in 2006 to include Section 4.2 stating:

Principles to be applied by the Society

4.2 In carrying out its functions, duties and powers under this Act, the Society shall have regard to the following principles:

1. The Society has a duty to maintain and advance the cause of justice and the rule of law.

2. The Society has a duty to act so as to facilitate access to justice for the people of Ontario.

3. The Society has a duty to protect the public interest.

4. The Society has a duty to act in a timely, open and efficient manner.

5. Standards of learning, professional competence and professional conduct for licensees and restrictions on who may provide particular legal services should be proportionate to the significance of the regulatory objectives sought to be realized.

Because of this, Tony Caruso has been fighting to get the Law Society of Ontario to formally comply with Provincial and Federal laws. We have drafted, certified and served the Law Society of Ontario a Notice of Application before Superior Court to fight for the rights of not only the paralegal profession but for the public that is entitled to affordable access to justice.

We have set up the battlefield and now we are asking you to join our cause and fight the good fight for our profession and for the public. Many of you have been asking how you can help; we are asking for donations to help pay for legal expenses for this battle to be expertly won for all of us. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

At this time, I would like to thank the Federal Government including the Minister of Immigration for reminding the Law Society of Ontario that paralegals are allowed to provide representation and advice as per IRPA. The Canadian Bar Association (CBA) sent a letter to the government lobbying to remove paralegals from the legislation; I am thankful for the federal government denying their request. For the CBA to send this letter, it once again reaffirms our right to practice immigration law.