Our lawyer, Pei-Shing B. Wang 王沛翔律師, was featured in today’s World Journal, a leading commercial newspaper in the Chinese community. Following is a translation of the article:
A York University graduate who is now a practising lawyer, Pei-Shing Wang reminds individuals who would like to become lawyers that in recent years law schools have been emphasizing oral advocacy. Effective presentation skills and English fluency are both important for those who wish to become lawyers.
After one year of senior high school [in Taiwan], Pei-Shing Wang moved to Vancouver to complete his secondary school diploma in 1999. Thereafter he studied commerce at the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto and law at Osgoode Hall Law School at York University.
Looking back, Pei-Shing Wang considers his first year of law school very challenging. “The Latin and the legal technical language were very difficult,” said Wang. To become familiar with legal writing, he relied on frequent review of the texts and diligent note taking.
When Wang first arrived at law school, he faced the vast difference between the continental [Taiwanese] law system and the common law system. He managed to let go of concepts not applicable to the common law so he could start again with an open mind, as if learning a second language.
After graduation from law school, lawyer candidates must pass the bar exam and article for 10 months before they are licensed. During the licensing process, the candidates must also demonstrate that they are of good character. No serious run-ins with the law are permitted.
Wang pointed out that visible minorities face additional challenges if they wish to article in major firms. The keys to securing an articling position in a major firm are good grades and fluent English.
According to Wang, an articling position in a major firm pays about $60,000 a year. Once he or she is licensed, the salary doubles or triples.
Although gaining admission to law school is difficult in itself, once the student is there he or she finds that studying law is no easy task. Fortunately, Wang was interested in studying precedents. “If you study law for money,” he said, “you will get bored easily.”
Regarding the tuition fees of $16,000 per year, Wang relied on student loans and scholarships. He recalled that although the lectures took up only about 10 hours per week, the time required to study the materials amounted to five times that much. In his second year, he chose family law, a field that members of the public can relate to. In his third year, he finished his major paper of approximately 10,000 words.
Wang reminds new immigrants that Canadian law may differ greatly from that of their native country. Newcomers to Canada are encouraged to observe the local law. For example, having an extra-marital affair would be grounds for divorce in Canada but not generally considered illegal. In Taiwan, on the other hand, adultery may be considered a crime.
Also, acceptable parenting styles may be quite different from those in immigrants’ native countries. In Canada, if parents still see their children as property and treat them as such, the authorities may become involved. Wang believes that parents should speak to their children when they misbehave.
Click on the image to view the actual file.
A Brief Note on Adultery in Divorce and Family Law
People are often misinformed about the true nature of adultery in family law. This is understandable. Information on the subject that is presented in TV dramas or the movies is rarely technically correct.
It’s important to understand that in family law adultery isn’t the same as “cheating.” While the definition of “cheating” is often subject to one’s moral latitude, the legal definition of adultery is not. For example, while having a sexually explicit conversation with another may be considered cheating by many, legally speaking, something more is required to establish adultery.
To establish adultery, no sex tape is required. Admission of an affair by the guilty spouse (or the third party) will likely suffice.* However, at the same time, evidence that amounts to a mere suspicion of your spouse having an affair (e.g., an unexplained lipstick stain on your husband’s shirt or a napkin with a phone number written on it) isn’t enough. The court must be convinced that on the balance of probabilities adultery has been committed.^
Interestingly, in the practice of family law, divorce claims on the ground of adultery are not all that common because adultery is only one of the three grounds for determining the breakdown of a marriage, the others being “cruelty” and “living separate and apart for at least one year.”
In many cases, separation is triggered by the discovery of an extramarital affair. However, by the time the parties are ready to deal with a divorce, they will likely have already been living separate and apart for one year. Therefore a claim of adultery will be unnecessary.
When confronted with a choice of claiming adultery or simply living separate and apart as the basis for divorce, I generally encourage my clients to choose the latter because it’s cheaper, less likely to be contested, and saves the parties from reliving difficult past events.
*see e.g., d’Entremont v. d’Entremont (1992), 44 R.F.L. (3d) 224 (N.S.C.A.)
^see e.g., George v. George, [1950] O.R. 787 (C.A.)
This blog is provided for your reference only and is not a substitute for the law. The law may have changed since the publication of this article. This article is not legal advice and should not be regarded as such.