Written by Charlotte Sullivan, second-year law student and NSRLP research assistant.
Since 2013, the NSRLP has been collecting information from self-represented litigants from across Canada via our SRL Intake Form (using SurveyMonkey). Our last report, published in January 2020, covered responses from self-represented litigants between January 2018 and June 2019. The NSRLP is pleased to now release our newest Intake Report, covering data collected between July 1, 2019 and June 30, 2021, from 279 respondents. This blog post summarizes some of the report’s key conclusions.
Demographic data
The demographic data of self-represented litigants during this intake period is largely consistent with that of former intake periods.
Over half of all respondents were over the age of 50, which matches data suggesting that individuals over 40 are more likely to be engaged in civil or family suits. For the first time, however, the NSRLP noted the inclusion of self-represented litigants under the age of 25. Different age brackets may be seeking out different methods of dispute resolution; however, it is interesting that younger litigants are included in this sample. More research may be warranted to explain and further analyze disparities in age brackets in the self-representation process.
The vast majority of respondents—77%— marked English as their first language. Many other first languages were reported in the sample however, including French, Mandarin, Cantonese, Spanish, Urdu, German, and Polish. Self-represented litigants in the sample were also highly educated. Almost 44% of respondents have a university degree and a further 22% have a college diploma. Even for highly educated self-represented litigants, however, representing oneself remains challenging. One respondent wrote: “I was a civil litigation lawyer for over 30 years. Regardless of my legal sophistication and extensive experience, it is a daunting experience to self-represent. Costs of every step are very high. Results are always extremely uncertain. The application of the law is often perplexing.”
Access to justice
A concerning number of self-represented litigants during the intake period reported having experienced discrimination on the basis of ability, gender, and/or race over the course of their cases. Systemic discrimination remains a significant issue that demands greater sensitivity on the part of judges, lawyers, and other actors within the justice system. Much work remains to be done.
Over half of all respondents reported earning under $30,000 a year, and even for respondents who reported earning especially high incomes, financial barriers were cited as reasons not to retain a lawyer for the entirety of their cases. Many self-represented litigants report having begun their cases with representation, only to later move to self-representation due to a depletion of funds. Legal services are not viewed as affordable or accessible by the vast majority of self-represented litigants over the mid- to long-term.
41% of all respondents identified as persons with disabilities, whether cognitive or physical. Disabled self-represented litigants reported additional barriers over the course of their cases, including technology barriers during the pandemic, difficulty seeking accommodations from courts and tribunals, or the toll their cases took on their physical and mental health. Disabled Canadians are disproportionately represented within the self-represented litigant community, and it is clear that insufficient support exists to assist them.
Almost 70% of self-represented litigants reported having worked with a lawyer at some point over the course of their case, but an alarmingly low number—only 8.4% of respondents—reported having successfully retained pro bono legal services. The decline in access to pro bono services is particularly concerning, and follows a trend the NSRLP has seen over recent years and reports.
Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic
This report covers the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and virtual legal proceedings. The biggest issues reported by self-represented litigants in relation to COVID-19 were: (a) the inaccessibility of services designed to assist them with their legal quandaries in ordinary times, many of which either became temporarily unavailable after March 2020 or were moved online; and (b) issues using technology to attend meetings and proceedings. Interestingly however, the experiences of self-represented litigants during the intake period were consistent before and after the onset of the pandemic in terms of overall satisfaction, demographic data, and issues raised in the open-ended section of the Intake Form.
Experiences within the justice system
The last section of the Intake Form is an open-ended question asking SRLs to write out their own stories, and offer tips for others who are self-representing. As always, an important portion of this Intake Report is dedicated to sharing the stories of self-represented litigants in their own words.
The vast majority of respondents expressed a view of the Canadian justice system as fundamentally unfair and or/unjust. Many feel that the odds are stacked against them from the get-go, and that courts are biased against self-represented litigants. One person noted that challenges are even greater for those with less privilege:
“One of the biggest lessons we have learned is that if you are short on cash, and up against well-resourced defendants such as an insurance company, the benefits of justice are extremely difficult to access. We are horrified, to be frank, at the extent to which the system is weighted in favour of those with the means to fully access it. We are white and reasonably well-educated people who were fortunate enough to get a good start in life. We shudder to think about what happens to people who are members of visible minority groups, or to people down on their luck, who have been wronged and have no way to even begin to make themselves whole again.”
However, self-represented litigants remain eager to help others and to contribute to broad changes to the justice system and its processes. Many respondents provided detailed and useful advice for other self-represented litigants on navigating procedure, preparing for proceedings, and conducting legal research.
The NSRLP will continue reporting on the experiences of SRLs in coming years, and we continue to encourage self-represented litigants to fill out our Intake Form. This data is enormously important in helping us plan future projects, develop resources, and decide what issues and topics to put our energies toward. It also informs legal professionals’ approach to self-representation by providing evidence of existing issues and biases. As actors in the justice system examine their blind spots and commit to addressing the access to justice gap, it is more crucial than ever before to seek out and consider the lived experiences of self-represented litigants themselves.
Since you have been collecting this information for years. It must have crossed your mind by now that the biggest problem with the judiciary is they don’t care about the rights of the public. There is an attitude of contempt and disrespect that no amount of being informed can correct. So your mission to change this system through education is flawed. It presupposes an interest in actually changing. If only they knew how. They do know how. They don’t care to change
i will follow up with one question, after all this time,, and Pintea, lymer and all other court decisions you have been involved in that support the rights of the self represented, NOT ONE THING has changed in our courts. At least out here in BC. No lawyer will help,, and i have been informed that no rights decisions apply to me, because the courts are “angry” at me. So this seems to remain a popularity contest. That is how you obtain justice, be likeable, Since when did that become the main evidence to determine a case??
Tend to somewhat agree, Sandra Olson.
I attempted to seek legal advice yet again. As before, and perhaps even more embeded was the question “how much in assets do you have?” and “who are you up against?” one of the countries wealthiest families…well then “I can’t help you…Here’s the door on your way out…”
On my way home, I had yet another discussion with myself as to the incompetence of a system based primarily on a business model rather than justice for all.
And all I was asking for was help in making a significant police report regarding a major unsolved case I now believe the system may not want resolved.
You as self representation are not part of the club, opening the corruption of the Law Society of Ontario would damage Lawyers, judges, government kleptocracy, big business stake holders.
I am trying to obtain I motor vehicle accident file from an insurance company, they are just playing with me.
Does anyone know how I could retrieve the full file.
Privacy officer didn’t work and ombudsman didn’t work.
Can I sue in small claims?
Your help appreciated
It is understandable that everyone commenting on the NSRLP blog talks about their own case(s). In order to move forward we need to look beyond our own individual experiences. With some effort I have secured an invitation to “observe”, via Zoom, a hearing scheduled to begin on Monday, November 15. File # 566-02-12916 is listed here – https://www.fpslreb-crtespf.gc.ca/fpslreb-crtespf/HearingAudience/Hearing.
.
The Federal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board acknowledges that its hearings are subject to the open court principle. This particular hearing is a grievance hearing. The B.C. provincial government has already heard from me about the fact that there is no schedule published of grievance arbitrations authorized under the B.C. Labour Relations Code. They have acknowledged receiving a letter from me but otherwise it appears that the intention is to ignore me. In which case I will be seeking a judgment and order from the BC Supreme Court.
.
I have no connection to the matter scheduled for a hearing starting on Monday. But it does look interesting. I initially learned something about it from the headline and what little can be read (by non-subscribers) of this article – https://www.blacklocks.ca/order-review-of-toxic-office/. CanLII has the original FPSLREB decision – https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/pslreb/doc/2018/2018fpslreb78/2018fpslreb78.html (637 paragraphs produced following a hearing that consumed 27 days) – and the Federal Court of Appeal one – https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fca/doc/2020/2020fca44/2020fca44.html (11 paragraphs). So I am interested in, among other things, how long this second tribunal hearing will take.
Can you tell me how many self-litigants who commit suicide as they are can’t deal with the process.
I know of four people who were advertised in the Vancouver who took their lives and there might be others.
I am sure the NSRLP have the information.
Hi Audrey, we unfortunately don’t have the resources to track this. But we are very concerned about the mental health toll self-representing clearly takes on so many people. We do occasionally (it is quite rare, thankfully) hear from SRLs who express suicidal thoughts. We always refer them to crisis hotlines and other resources. And we always recommend mental health resources to every SRL who reaches out to us, particularly our guide, “Considering Mindfulness: How you can use mindfulness to increase your focus and relieve the stress of representing yourself.“
This ^^^^^^^^^^ especially male self represented, who are often penilized with poor parenting access, falsely accused of DV, or rage, while female DV perpetrators are dismissed or condoned (as with our situation).
Neutral Partisanship and conflict of interest issues are some of the biggest challenges for citizens attempting to retain legal counsel within the Canadian legal system. The smaller the jurisdiction (and thus legal gene pool), the more challenging these issues can become. Nobody wants to bite the hand that feeds them, and that adage is especially true for lawyers. To cross the Ts and dot the Is on a written retainer that is against Government, or Crown Corporation or prominent businesses with community ties or anyone closely associated with these entities within our socialist system can be an extremely frustrating task in its own right. Ultimately 100% full representation is the right and goal for each and every Canadian …… and but one option to absolutely and unequivocally guarantee it.
So I am self represented in a case under the divorce act and the order being made in 1992, I have become very aware of rules regulations and such, pertaining to the Supreme Court of B.C. and I do have many issues, but reading mostly complaints I would like to make a positive comment, obtaining actual legal advise has been a time consuming endeavor but my experience dealing with the Williams Lake Supreme Court registry has been very pleasing, I have been talking with a lady there who of course can not give legal advise but she has been so accommodating and gone out of her way to help that I truly commend her, I feel as if she really cares and after having a request without notice rejected 5 plus times for various reasons such as my draft order was not signed by me and stupid errors like my application listed a hearing date that is not available for hearings but back to my request it seems that I must apply via chambers in person or request m.s. teams which being in Burnaby I find necessary, the registry staff will assist you if you word your questions in a way as to ask for confirmation as opposed to seeking advise. This lady has been wonderful and I feel like I am getting to know her, thank you williams Lake Supreme Court registry for caring!
How great to hear that you’ve encountered someone so helpful and empathetic! There are so many good people within the system, who really do want to do their best to help SRLs.