DCHP-3

judicare

DCHP-2 (Oct 2016)

Spelling variants:
Judicare

n. & adj. Law, Administration

a type of legal aid whereby clients choose their own private lawyers who are funded by the provincial government.

Type: 5. Frequency In Canada, judicare refers to a type of legal aid plan whereby eligible underprivileged clients receive legal services from a private lawyer of their choice (see the 1995 and second 2010 quotations). These private lawyers are then compensated by the provincial government for their services. The judicare system is contrasted with the "staff" system, whereby clients are assigned salaried public defenders (see the 1982 quotation). The judicare model is one of three broad types of legal aid in Canada, alongside the aforementioned "staff" system and the "mixed" (staff-judicare) system.
The term judicare is said to have been coined in 1956 by Phillip S. Habermann, an American lawyer from Wisconsin (Habermann 1971: 307), who defined the term as a type of legal plan whereby persons of low income are able to "choose their attorney, who performs the services required and is paid from government funds" (Habermann 1971: 306). OED-3 marks the term as originally from the US (see OED-3, s.v. "judicare"). The term is said to be modelled on the concept of "medicare" (see COD-2, s.v. "judicare"). As seen in Chart 1, the term is today most frequently used in Canada.
See also COD-2, s.v. "judicare", which is marked "Cdn".
The term judicare is often used attributively, such as "judicare model", "judicare system" or "judicare program".

Quotations

1966
An experimental program that issues credit cards to poor people entitling them to free legal help from private lawyers is so popular in Superior that lawyers predict it will spread across the country. Called Judicare, the new program is the first full-scale test in the United States of the English legal-aid system of direct government subsidies to private lawyers who represent the poor. [...] Phillip S. Habermen, executive director of the state bar and the originator of Judicare, said it is proving so successful that "it could put conventional legal aid out of business".
1971
In his report, Taman describes Ontario's legal aid plan as "judicare" and says that by its design, legislation and administration it cannot meet the needs of the poor. Under the Ontario scheme, a person who feels he needs legal help fills out a financial report and the Department of Social and Family Services decides how much of the projected cost of the case he can pay.
1982
Edward McGinley, director of Legal Aid New Brunswick, said flatly that he's "biased and prejudiced in favor of the judicare system" of using private lawyers on fees rather than introducing salaried public defenders. He had not yet read the latest report.
1995
Can the new Tory government continue with a judicare system, the central tenet of which is to give the poor the right to choose their own lawyer, rather than have one assigned by a staff clinic?
2004
Canada provides legal aid through separate legal aid plans in each of the provinces and territories. Though each provincial/territorial government has developed its own personalized legal aid scheme, three general models have been adopted to deliver legal aid systems: judicare, staff and mixed. Judicare, a fee-for-service system, uses private lawyers who bill the legal aid plan for their services. The client may retain any lawyer who is willing to accept the case. Ontario and Alberta are the only provinces that operate judicare systems.
2006
New Brunswick increased and expanded legal aid offices after moving from a judicare model to a mixed staff-judicare model, with a combination of permanent staff and private-practice lawyers.
2010
"And we have got to get both the federal and provincial government down to look at things like judicare or potentially issues like mediation and giving judges the power to order it." Judicare is a legal aid model in which legal services are provided by lawyers in private practice who are paid by the legal aid plan.
2010
In terms of the allocation of legal aid resources within Canada, Ontario, Alberta, and New Brunswick utilize predominantly the judicare model, whereas Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, and Saskatchewan rely predominantly on the staff model. Quebec, Manitoba, British Columbia, the Northwest Territories, and the Yukon have adopted a mixed model, with major judicare and staff elements. In jurisdictions beyond Canada, similar divergences in choice of models are also observable.
2013
As described in the Introduction, there are three basic models used in the delivery of legal aid services in family law cases in Canada: primarily staff; primarily judicare (private lawyers); and a mixed model of service delivery, which uses both staff and judicare.

References

  • COD-2
  • OED-3
  • Habermann (1971)

Images


        Chart 1: Internet Domain Search, 30 Aug. 2013

Chart 1: Internet Domain Search, 30 Aug. 2013