Legal Aid, Courtworker, and Public Legal Education and Information Needs in the Yukon Territory: Final Report

6. Civil Legal Aid

6. Civil Legal Aid

6.1 Coverage of Civil and Family Matters

Until 2001, legal aid coverage in civil and family matters included:

As noted in Section 2.4, in response to the Operational Review in 2000, the YLSS has begun to fund selected family cases through to permanent orders, has implemented the Support Variation Maintenance Project, and funded some complex permanent wardship trials. At this stage, formal criteria have not been developed to clarify what types of family cases merit funding, and coverage is provided on a case-by-case basis. However, in general terms, approval has been extended to more difficult cases or cases where parties are entrenched in strong disagreement.

Of 380 family and civil legal aid applications in 2001-2002, 70 (18 percent) were refused. Of these refusals, 43 (61 percent) were for financial reasons, 22 (31 percent) were for coverage reasons, and five (7 percent) were on the basis of merit. There is thus a higher overall rate of refusals of civil/family applications than for criminal applications (as described in Section 2.4). Coverage refusals reflect the discretionary decisions that YLSS is making based on the difficulty of cases (see previous paragraph). Financial refusals are likely a reflection of applicants having at least some resources, whereas criminal applicants often have none.

6.2 Civil Data

It is even more difficult to align YLSS civil/family data with civil/family data from the court system than is the case with criminal case comparisons. This is due to the fact that case categories are defined differently, that YLSS "cases" may involve more than one application by the same person, and because court data is on a calendar basis and YLSS data is on a fiscal year basis. Nevertheless, if one eliminates small claims and non-family civil cases in Territorial and Supreme courts from Table 16, legal aid coverage, reflected in Table 17, would appear to be dealing with 65-80 percent of family cases heard in Territorial and Supreme courts.

Table 16
Civil and Family Cases per Year in All Yukon Courts
Court Level and Cases Type Year
1999 2000 2001 Jan 1 - June 30, 2002
Supreme Adoption 6 8 6 4
Child 38 39 55 24
Divorce 104 107 91 51
Family 24 12 9 3
Infant - 1 - -
Maintenance Enforcement 16 15 21 7
Other 383 349 356 145
Reciprocal Emforcement 2 6 5 3
Territorial
Child 5 8 6 1
Family - 6 3 2
Maintenance Enforcement 107 95 91 31
Other 21 44 33 12
Reciprocal Enforcement 2 5 2 2
Wardship 23 25 21 15
Appeals Court Other 17 20 28 7
Federal Other 2 3 7 -
Small Claims Other 225 224 227 80
All Courts 975 967 961 387

Notes:

  1. Source: Court Services, Department of Justice, YTG.
  2. These data do not include immigration cases.
  3. "Other" refers to non-family civil cases (e.g., bankruptcy, labour relations, probate, etc.).Since these are not covered by legal aid, they are simply presented as a single category.
  4. Frequency counts are based on cases initiated in the given year, but include cases that are closed in that or subsequent years, as well as cases ongoing as of June 30, 2002.
  5. It appears that the volume of civil and family cases will decrease for 2002. Projections for the entire year, based on these data, are 774 for the entire year, or 811, based on supplementary data, to October 8, 2002.

Table 17: Approved Family and Civil Legal Aid Cases

The data on YLSS civil coverage in Table 17 clearly reflects the coverage described in Section 5.1, with interim custody cases comprising the majority of cases (55-61 percent), wardship cases approximately 20 percent, and mental health cases approximately 9 percent of overall cases.

6.3 Practical Limitations on Family/Civil Delivery

Several practical limitations on effective delivery of family and civil legal aid were identified:

6.4 Family and Civil Needs

While respondents uniformly acknowledged that progress had been made in funding some family cases through to final orders, many felt there were still family and civil needs that needed urgent attention.

6.5 Delivery Strategies

Several strategies for more effective delivery of family/civil were discussed in the focus group. These included: