EDITORIAL
2 Obiter Dicta
Walking Into Court
Is “Physical” Access to Justice Attainable?
I
f you’v e ev er been to 47 Sheppard Avenue
East, you’ll know the point of this article well
before I reach it. 47 Sheppard is a Toronto courthouse primarily used for small claims matters,
a location I first entered as a wide-eyed caseworker
starting the Parkdale intensive. The building is ominous and grey, accessible only from a side entrance,
with no reception desk, and the type of parking lot
that makes you wish you took public transit. Despite
trafficking thousands of lawyers, judges, officials, and
individuals every day, 47 Sheppard is, without doubt,
one of the least accessible buildings in the city.
Walking in for the first time, I was immediately
lost. I went to a counter on the right hand side of the
lobby and asked for the floor where employment matters were heard. I was told to ask at the room across
the hall, where it was suggested to me that I return to
the counter I had just visited. Fortunately, I gave up
on asking and managed to find my way to my peers.
In subsequent visits, I’ve become slightly more comfortable moving around the courthouse, but have
remained shocked by how difficult the building is to
access and navigate.
That being said, the Court’s mission has been just
the opposite. Those operating the Court understand
that 47 Sheppard is the “people’s court,” a location for
individuals of all backgrounds and circumstances to
seek justice on an even footing. The Court has taken
important steps to improve accessibility: labelling
floors, posting signs, and hiring friendly and supportive staff. Unfortunately, in the overall sea of chaos,
these steps are like pebbles in a river. The reality of 47
Sheppard is that it is cold, confusing, and difficult to
navigate. Unfortunately, my experience in other city
courts has not varied, and I wouldn’t be at all surprised to hear that other Canadian courthouses are
similar, if not worse.
What does this mean for court users? For the lawyers and judges, not much. The elites of the legal
system, lawyers and judges using the courts have the
freedom to move about, check in on courtrooms, and
speak to court officials as they wish. They do not risk
being reprimanded for walking into the courtroom
too early, or embarrassed by a court official if they
ask a silly question. Working at Parkdale, I can say
unabashedly that I found dealing with the courts as
confusing as anyone. The difference for me, and for the
lawyers I’ve seen, is that navigating through that confusion is, at least, manageable.
For the individual, the physical experience of
going to court seems much worse. At 47 Sheppard, I
a. Osgoode Hall Law School, 0014g
York University
4700 Keele Street
Toronto, on m3j 1p3
e. [email protected]
w. obiter-dicta.ca
t. @obiterdictaoz
“Quote goes here.”
attribution
watched confused and frustrated clients wander aimlessly until their lawyer came to collect them. For selfrepresenting individuals, the experience looked even
more difficult, going from courtroom to courtroom to
read the list of hearings, trying to spot their name and
some indication of when their matter would be heard.
It is a humiliating experience that leaves individuals utterl y dependent, and places highly personal and
sensitive matters into a dehumanized and unsympathetic environment.
Access to Justice, for the legal community, continues to revolve around pumping infinite amounts of
legal information into the public domain, and using
technology to make that information easier to read
and understand. This is a complicated mission, but
perhaps it’s no surprise lawyers have chosen to focus
on it over the relatively simpler, yet more embarrassing, task of admitting the basic flaws with the buildings where “law” is supposed to happen.
And here lies the point of this article, a point so
self-evident that it will make any 47 Sheppard user
roll their eyes in exacerbation. If you can’t physically
access the space where the legal system operates, you
can’t really access “justice” either! The possibilities
of good legal education, strong legal aid systems, and
feasible legal technologies all mean nothing if, when
the day comes, you can’t even find the courtroom
where your hearing is taking place. It’s well past time
for lawyers, judges, and officials (who, like me, complain behind the scenes about the confusing courthouses all the time!) to publicly acknowledge this
problem and take immediate, foundational steps to
resolve it.
Improving physical access to justice will take a
concerted effort on the part of governments and the
provincial law societies. Every courthouse should be
equipped with a “Help Desk” right at the entrance to
guide individuals and answer questions. Effort needs
to be made to install signage which clearly points
individuals to services (such as duty council, family
services, and youth services) available in the courthouse. Lastly, every court should post each day’s matters on a screen in a central location, as is done in most
public buildings, so that all court users can quickly
verify when and where their matter will be heard.
For law students, and those entering the profession, I believe that what’s most important is an attitudinal change. The confusion of going to court is not
a passing annoyance to be laughed about over drinks
with the other lawyers. It is an embarrassment and
affront to the system and the profession, and should
editorial board
editor-in-chief | Sam Michaels
managing editor | Erin Garbett
creative director | Heather Pringle
editorial staff
business managers | Alvin Qian,
Vincent Neil Ho
communications manager | Carla Marti
news editor | Simmy Sahdra
opinion editor | Nadia Aboufariss
arts & culture editor | Kathleen Killin
sports editor | Kenneth Lam
website editor | Asad Akhtar
ê Photo credit: The National Post
be treated as such. We should not be apathetic to an
obvious problem, one which has such a substantial
effect on already disadvantaged individuals, and is so
relatively simple to address. The lawyer is not there to
babysit their client, and lawyers everywhere should
be ashamed when the court system requires them to
take on that role. As we enter the profession, it will be
our responsibility to demand for ourselves, and for our
clients, improvements to the courtroom experience.
The physical experience of going to court should
be the least difficult part of a legal situation. It should
be the location where our government helps disputing individuals by putting them in a fair and neutral
setting to resolve their problem. A legal situation is
often difficult enough itself; the court should be the
place to restore order, not add to the difficulty. As
future lawyers, we need to reject apathy, hold courts
to a high standard, and not settle when they fall below
it. Physical access to justice is just as important as
any other element, and it’s time we bring it out of the
background, and into the forefront. u
staff writers
Evan Ivkovic, Shannon Corregan, Anthony
Choi, Michael Motala, Kareem Webster
l ayout staff
Rachel McPherson, Karen Wang
contributors
Jerico Espinas, Michael Ly, Justin Philpott,
Micheal Silver, Abigail Cheung
Submissions for the September 28 issue are
due at 5pm on September 19, and should be
submitted to: [email protected]
The Obiter Dicta is published biweekly
during the school year, and is printed by
Weller Publishing Co. Ltd.
Obiter Dicta is the official student newspaper
of Osgoode Hall Law School. The opinions
expressed in the articles contained herein are
not necessarily those of the Obiter staff. The
Obiter reserves the right to refuse any submission that is judged to be libelous or defamatory,
contains personal attacks, or is discriminatory
on the basis of sex, race, religion, or sexual orientation. Submissions may be edited for length
and/or content.