Procedural changes that have progressive effects are not sufficient to count as ‘fiscal redistribution’
Julius H. Grey et al. 4, Julius H. Grey, B.C.L. McGill University, B.C.L. (Oxon), Associate Professor at McGill University 1976-2003, member of Quebec and Manitoba Bars; Genevieve Coutlee, B.C.L./LL.B. McGill University, LL.M. Harvard Law School, member of the Quebec Bar; Marie-Eve Sylvestre, LL.B. Universite de Montreal, LL.M. Harvard Law School, S.J.D. Candidate Harvard Law School, member of the Quebec Bar, “Access to Justice and the New Code of Civil Procedure,” 38 R.J.T. 711, 2004, Lexis
While no effort should be spared in persuading lawyers to give a portion of their time to servicing the indigent 108, in part, to make them all aware of the realities of working for the less fortunate, redistribution through taxation is probably a more effective tool. In any event, it is not possible to imagine that the system of justice can be made more accessible merely through changing procedure and forums. A major element of fiscal redistribution is essential.