Paralegals play a vital role in the legal profession and can provide important support in the provision of legal services. Today, paralegals play a critical role in the delivery of legal services. Depending on the firm or organization, tasks may include: Administrations around the world have faced the challenge of providing high-quality legal services to the public at a price that the public can afford. When seeking solutions, Canada and Ontario can look at how different countries have involved non-lawyers in the provision of legal services to reduce costs. For example, by expanding the scope of legal services that non-lawyers can offer at lower prices, or by allowing non-lawyers to manage, invest or own law firms to increase the variety and range of legal services available. Japan is an interesting case study; Japan has a strong monopoly on the provision of legal services and even criminalizes the unauthorized exercise of this right. However, the extent of the monopoly is relatively narrow. This is mainly the right to appear in court. What is less clear is whether lawyers in Japan enjoy a legally protected monopoly on transactional work. With the changing legal environment and increasing access to education and training, the role of a paralegal is also constantly evolving, whether in terms of the duties and responsibilities they perform, the expectations of lawyers and clients towards them, or the skills they can bring to the organization. Nevertheless, the importance of their role in the provision of legal services and the value they can add to the practice, department or business are recognized. In addition to case-specific work, paralegals can also help train new employees and thus ensure consistency within a company.
For example, paralegals can provide new lawyers and staff with information about that particular law firm`s research tools, case preparation and protocol. Despite the ease of access to legal services created by this boom, the rapid growth of advocacy has led commentators like He to worry about the quality of services available and whether these issues can lead to public dissatisfaction with the system. Recently, the government has taken steps towards judicial reform to improve the quality of China`s judicial system. In a report entitled “Court Reform Plan,” the Chinese government seeks to empower the judiciary and professionalize judicial personnel by distinguishing them from other types of government officials. As the creator of the legendary Forbes magazine, Malcolm Forbes, once said, “Never hire someone who knows less than you about what they were hired to do.” Why would you accept less than that for those you entrust to act on your behalf in legal matters? Article by Carlin Brunner-Evans and Warwick Ryan Although they are not admitted to the bar (except for those with a law degree), paralegals often perform legal functions that are also performed by lawyers. Under the supervision of a senior lawyer, they may keep their own records and perform work that would otherwise have been done by a junior lawyer. In the context of the distinction between “legal information” and “legal advice”, a number of issues were raised, including the impact on clients, the impact on the appropriate referral, fears of legal liability, quality issues, and who was able to provide different types of support. China is another interesting example.
As noted in Foreign Policy and by jurists such as Weifang He, China also restricts the provision of legal services to non-lawyers. In China, however, there are many more lawyers available to the population. The legal profession has grown extremely rapidly over the past 30 years, with law becoming a popular major and law schools opening across the country. As a result, the number of lawyers in the country is booming, and it has become one of the countries with the most lawyers per capita. There were also different views on the importance of advocacy. For example, a chamber judge saw advice regarding the defence of the interests of a particular client. In contrast, community workers did not tend to view advocacy as legal advice.