The LSBC hopes to pause litigation and transitional measures related to the divisive legislation
In the wake of the Conservative Party of British Columbia winning a majority government in the province this weekend, the Law Society of BC is betting on the party’s promise to repeal the Legal Professions Act, the controversial legislation that the legal regulator has been fighting for years.
Passed in 2024 by the BC NDP, the Legal Professions Act seeks to bring lawyers, paralegals, and notaries – who have long been overseen by separate regulatory bodies – under a single regulator. While the LSBC has said it is in favour of a single regulator for all three professions, it took issue with the legislation introducing a new governing board for the regulator, which would give lawyer-elected lawyers less power than they currently hold at the LSBC.
The LSBC and Trial Lawyers Association of BC sued the province to challenge the law. After the BC Supreme Court determined that the law was constitutional this spring, they filed an appeal.
But those arguments may be moot by mid-January, when the BC Court of Appeal is slated to hear arguments in the case.
The BC Conservatives have repeatedly indicated support for the LSBC’s stance on the Legal Professions Act over the years. In a policy declaration presented at the party’s annual general meeting in March 2025, the party explicitly stated that it aimed to repeal the legislation.
The party repeated that promise shortly after BC Premier David Eby called a snap election in September, sending a letter to the heads of the LSBC, the TLABC, the Canadian Bar Association’s British Columbia branch, and the Insurance Bureau of Canada.
“We’ll repeal the NDP's 2024 Legal Professions Act changes that undermine the profession's independence and self-governance,” party leader Lorne Doerkson wrote in the letter. “An independent bar and judiciary are the backbone of the rule of law. The government should not be tinkering with them.”
LSBC president Thomas Spraggs told Canadian Lawyer on Monday that the law society expects “the new government to follow through with this very important commitment for British Columbians.
“The effect, of course, will be that we will preserve the independence of the bar and ideally have a collaborative and constructive dialogue with the government on how to make sure that the public interest is best served,” Spraggs adds.
Connor Bildfell, president of the CBABC, notes that Doerkson’s letter did not provide details on the repeal. Bildfell is one of several lawyers representing the national CBA in the Legal Professions Act litigation. The CBA intervened in the case to argue that the legislation is unconstitutional.
Speaking on behalf of the CBABC, which is not an intervener in the case, Bildfell says any changes the BC Conservatives bring “should involve meaningful consultation with the legal profession and sufficient time to get the regulatory framework right.
“Whatever the Conservatives are planning to do, we would welcome dialogue with the newly elected government,” he says, adding that the parties in the Legal Professions Act case now have a chance to talk about whether litigation needs to continue.
The LSBC aims to talk to its lawyers as soon as possible about how to proceed with the appeal, Spraggs says.
He adds that the law society will be asking the new government for permission to pause the transitional measures it had taken to implement the new regulator under the Legal Professions Act. In September, LSBC benchers voted to require BC lawyers to pay two levies to support the measures, which were mandated under the legislation but received no government funding. The LSBC was projected to spend $5.4 million on the transition by the end of 2027.
“Repealing the act will stop further costs to the profession caused by the transition,” Spraggs says.
The BC Conservatives did not respond to a request for comment.
Repeal would leave paralegals behind, org argues
The BC Paralegal Association, a nonprofit organization that represents paralegals in the province, is less enthusiastic about the BC Conservatives’ promise.
Unlike other jurisdictions, BC does not currently license paralegals. To perform certain tasks – such as providing legal advice to clients and appearing before tribunals or at family law mediations – paralegals in the province must work under the supervision of a lawyer.
However, a paralegal does not possess these rights outside the context of a specific relationship with their supervising lawyer. If they move to a different job, they lose those rights and can only regain them on a case-by-case basis.
The BCPA was one of 12 interveners in the Legal Professions Act case. The organization supports giving paralegals standalone licensing.
In early October, BCPA president Rosina Jagore wrote to Doerkson, arguing the legislation “represents a historic effort to create a pathway toward the regulation of paralegals as legal professionals in British Columbia.
“For many years, policymakers, legal stakeholders, and public-sector participants have recognized that the growing access-to-justice crisis requires innovative solutions that expand the public's ability to obtain affordable, competent legal assistance,” Jagore wrote. “A regulated paralegal profession has the potential to be one of those solutions.”
Jagore added that Doerkson’s promise to repeal the legislation “offers no corresponding vision for the future regulation of paralegals in British Columbia.”
Jamie Maclaren, who represents the organization in the Legal Professions Act case, told Canadian Lawyer that Doerkson has not yet responded to the letter. He argued that BC’s current longstanding regulatory model for legal professions “has proven unable or unwilling to make room” for the possibility of independent, licensed paralegal practice.
“Protecting lawyers’ independence should not mean locking in the regulatory structures of the past or preventing the legislature from creating new classes of licensed legal professionals,” Maclaren says.
Spraggs notes that in 2023, the LSBC asked the provincial government to amend BC’s regulatory regime for legal professionals to allow for the licensing of paralegals.
“I think there [are] big opportunities for continued discussion about amalgamating paralegals, notaries, and lawyers under a single profession,” he says, emphasizing again that the LSBC’s opposition to the Legal Professions Act is rooted in how it gives lawyer-elected lawyers less say over their own regulation.
“My hope is that we can work in a really collaborative and constructive way to enhance the public interest for all people in British Columbia,” Spraggs adds. “Paralegals play an incredibly important role in that.”
