Lawyers and attorneys / Anwälte, vor allem in Kanada

Aus Stephan Handschug, Einführung in das kanadische Recht:

bq. In Kanada … hat diese Unterscheidung [zwischen Barrister und Solicitor] nur noch historische Bedeutung. Zwar findet sich die Differenzierung nach wie vor auf den Briefköpfen der meisten Anwaltskanzleien wieder. Dies hat allerdings vor allem traditionellen Gründe, da jedes Mitglied einer Rechtsanwaltskammer der jeweiligen Provinz sowohl die Tätigkeit eines Barristers als auch diejenige eines Solicitors ohne Einschränkungen wahrnehmen darf.

Recently, on a mailing list, a translator who rarely does legal texts asked the meaning of ‘have your signature witnessed by a lawyer or attorney or member of the town council’ (that wasn’t an exact quote). She knew there are two kinds of lawyers in England and Wales and wondered if these were them.

I don’t think I will now define all these terms: lawyer, attorney, barrister, solicitor, advocate, jurist, paralegal, legal executive and what have you.

Suffice it to say that the English division between barristers and solicitors (‘the divided legal profession’) was followed by some former colonies. Some didn’t follow it, some dropped it.

In Canada, there is now no distinction, but all lawyers can call themselves ‘barrister and solicitor’ – I’ve even seen ‘barrister, solicitor and attorney’. This is really confusing. So now I’ve found a picture of one and would like to link it as a reminder. It comes from the weblog of a Canadian lawyer the daily snivel (admirable cat content in the latest entry). Here it is, entitled Barrister and Solicitor.

bq. I’m pictured above in my legal robes, which are required court attire in the Superior Court and every appeal court, and you can’t be Called to the Bar without them. While some people simply borrow or rent theirs, I know I’ll be needing them sooner or later, and I wouldn’t feel like a proper lawyer if I didn’t have them ready for an unexpected trip to the Supreme Court (as happened to one of my mentors within a week of his first being Called). They cost me $500, all told, but I think they’re worth every penny scrimped and borrowed to afford them.

11 thoughts on “Lawyers and attorneys / Anwälte, vor allem in Kanada

  1. Yes, I should have mentioned that I have no problem with people reading RSS feeds privately. I read a lot. But does this mean that a Google home page with my feed can be posted publicly – that is, is this site doing it via Google? You see for example that they bypass my Google ads and use my content to attract people to their own. Have they done that via Google or independently?
    I imagine the ‘showing the whole content’ is my decision when I create the feed reader. And yes, I will at the very least edit the field right down if I have to.

  2. Just to make this clear: my content is copyright, so for people to publish the whole of my feed is not permitted. Of course, this has happened before and it has been stopped. It is done at JuraBlogs with my consent.
    What is different in the present case is that Google is offering my feed to others without a copyright notice.
    From what you say, it has been going on for a long time, has it?

  3. You need to log in to your Google account to access your home page, so in some sense that is private. (Not in a very strong sense, though.)

    The Northern Ireland site is not even using your RSS feed; they’re downloading your front page as a browser would, removing the headers and footers, and including it inline. Note that they list the number of comments on each post, which your RSS feed doesn’t.

    Ah, now I look a little closer, this is probably not intentional on their part, and an email to them should fix it; you can supply any url whatsoever as the path argument. The intention seems to be to display the MySQL documentation using their look and feel, and whoever implemented that used PHP functions that accept URLs as well as file names, without making sure that the content was something they wanted to show.

  4. Thanks very much about the NI site – I did email them two or three days ago, of course, but have heard nothing. I did have the feeling they must be using it to demonstrate MySQL, and I couldn’t see that such a site would be particularly interested in my blog. I will write to them again with that information.

    As for the Google home pages, can they be seen on the Web? I mean, who wants a private homepage no-one else can see?

  5. I mean, who wants a private homepage no-one else can see?

    As I understand it, the idea is that your search start page also shows other relevant information that reflects your personal tastes; the weather locally, how many new mails in your Gmail inbox, headlines from some selection of feeds, and so on. Distracting and cluttered, IMO, but I’m probably not representative in this :-) .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.