Jonathan Lisus

2I'm great, Pulat, how are you?

4Well, I'm just flattered that you think that some people might be interested in anything I have to say.

6I'm not. My roots, I guess it depends how deep you want to dig. I I was born in Johannesburg, South Africa, and my family came to Toronto in the late '70s, and I've been here ever since. Go back further than that, as my name suggests, it's of Eastern European origin, but I was a third-generation South African.

8Yeah, yeah, I was 12. 3 sisters. My sisters were 16, 14, and 8, I think. So young family, tough on my parents. I came to realize that in retrospect, the story of many immigrations, not as tough as as many. But yeah, it was an interesting experience, a big cultural experience in the, in the late '70s. You know systems weren't as integrated as they are today with all of the communication modalities we have. So it's a, it's a period I remember well. I'm sure you do too.

10Everything, you know, everything.

12Well, my parents were very interesting. My dad's gone now, lost him 4 years ago, but he— at 87— but he was a fascinating character. He we're Jewish. He grew up in rural South Africa, very poor, and lived in a— born and raised in a small town that was the junction of two railway lines. And his father, who was a Russian immigrant, had a general store, and they grew up there in the country in the Depression. And There wasn't, of course, a lot of currency, it being the Depression, so it was really barter. And among the many interesting features of my father's story is these— this was in the days of polio and polio scares, so he contracted polio as a little boy.

13He was 4 and spent 6 months in the conventional treatment for serious polio case, which was in an iron lung and a plaster cast, you know, to keep your limbs from closing in. And then when he got through that, and for all of his life and all of my life certainly, he was pretty seriously disabled, couldn't walk without big steel braces on his legs had very small legs physically. So grew up with, you know, being close to serious physical disability. And then he pulled himself up from very distressed economic circumstances went to work in the dynamite factory after, after high school, put himself through night school, became a solicitor in South Africa, built a practice, then gave that up and went into business.

14But a colorful, engaging, tough guy.

16It was my choice. I never knew my dad as a lawyer. I knew him as an entrepreneur, as a businessman. It was my choice. They didn't— they encouraged it, but not in any particular way. It was something that I guess I had a romantic notion about— still do, actually, in many ways. But it was a career that kind of revealed itself to me naturally. I think it fit my personality and it fit my, my view about things and how and where I could make a contribution.

18Yeah, I had an undergraduate degree in philosophy.

20yeah, with a minor in political science. And I actually loved philosophy, did not like law school. I loved philosophy and did quite well in it. And I said to my dad, at one point towards the end of my undergrad, you know, I think I'm going to be a philosophy professor. And he kind of glared at me and he said, no, you're not. You're going to be 40 years old with a beard and corduroys shuffling around an office somewhere, and you're not going to be happy. You've got to do something else. So that something else turned out to be law school, which I think, like some lawyers I didn't particularly enjoy, but I got through it.

22Yeah, that's a great it's a great question. I think that there's a lot of— I think there's a lot of points of connection, you know, philosophy, math, music. Yeah, my nephew did his degree in, in music at U of T, and we were interested in a lot of similar things. So yeah, I do think that. I mean, as you know, a lot of the great philosophers were also or equally mathematicians, right?

24It was. Now when I got an offer from McCarthy's to article, it was McCarthy and McCarthy. And then a couple of months later, it changed to McCarthy Tétrault, in which they did the national merger, which was interesting. They had to go up to the Supreme Court of Canada to get that done. But I applied to and was hired by McCarthy& McCarthy. My first ambition actually was to be a criminal lawyer and a Crown. And by some fluke, I got a job at the Crown Law Office, 720 Bay. And then that cured me of wanting to be a Crown. And I got some advice from the folks there, and they suggested I apply to McCarthy's, which I did.

25and I got articles there and stayed there for 20 years.

27I was pretty lucky. I was pretty lucky to get accepted, but you only got to get in, right?

29Yes, that's right.

31Yeah.

33It was an interesting time. You know, you remind me of, of that. It was also the Gulf War, right?

35So I remember that breaking out when I was articling, and the Scud attacks on Israel. And the other interesting feature of 1990-91 was it was the beginning of a real deep recession, right? So hireback was pretty distressed and folks were pretty anxious about that. And I remember there were all sorts of terrific students and candidates who didn't get hired back, particularly if they wanted to be in a business program. Somewhere and were unemployed for months and months. You know, that's not a cycle that's been seen for a while. There was a brief little blip in 2008 with the credit crisis where firms were paying people not to come, but 1990 was a pretty deep recession and a pretty protracted hiring freeze.

37Well, I'm going to be very direct and tell you I don't know because I don't do that. So I, you know, in that case, you're referring to the recent case, was an interesting one about the bond, the Israeli program.

39we were instructed on that, and they were the witnesses in the case. One of your former interviewees I think case managed it for a while, Justice Myers. But we were instructed by the Economic Mission in New York. So there were two very sophisticated young Israeli women, one was a lawyer, one who was an economist, But like most states, like most Western states, they are in legal proceedings all over the place. So the administrative aspects of it were pretty straightforward. But actually, it's a good question who the know your client form— how the know your client form actually works in the case of a state. I acted as well for the Republic of Estonia.

40Not sure what we did there.

42You know how one finds any clients. They were referred by someone. That particular case was a referral. I forget from who. I think it might have been the Dentons law firm, who had a long relationship with them, and had to take another piece of the case for Computershare. The case in which I acted for the Republic of Estonia was, I think, a referral from the Goodman's law firm. So there's no real rhyme or reason, as you know, where do cases come from? They just kind of show up, right?

44Well, my tenure at my firm was spawned by McCarthy's, but origin of it, Terry and Cliff and Eleanor, it was initially in '97, Lax, O'Sullivan, Cronk, right? And what was interesting about that was the three founders came from three different programs, right? Cliff was Goodman's, Terry was Macmillan, Eleanor was Faskens. Before that, let me get into a little bit of the history of the, you know, the current generation of boutiques. Before that, the boutiques came out of one firm, and Lenczner Slaght being the first one of that generation from McCarthy's, 5 lawyers from McCarthy's in '92. And then Cliff, Terry, and Eleanor, I think '97, and then in A few years after that, 3 or 4 years, I think 4 years Chris Paliare and Linda Rothstein and Ken Rosenberg and Ian Roland all came out of Gowlings, right?

45And so the, the sort of trajectory of these boutiques coming out of big firms, the current generation anyway, and the current established set of boutiques did come out of larger, larger programs. But you're quite right, I mean, McCarthy's has had a real impact on shaping the litigation landscape over the last 20 years, 25, 30 years. It's an interesting observation, you know, Pulat, if you look back at this, and I have, and I'm sure you have as well, before that, you know, '70s, '80s, there were some very prominent boutiques like Kimber Dubin, for example, and they were all going into full-service firms, right? Into Torys, for instance, for instance, in the case of Kimber Dubin, because the belief was they would have a more ready access to corporate relationships and corporate clients.

46Mr. Robinette went, went into McCarthy's McCarthy's picked up other people. And then as the conflict principles developed and became more pronounced, and as firms started to concentrate more on corporate work, we saw practitioners starting to come out of them, right? Lenczner's, Lax, Paliare. So it's an interesting kind of evolutionary process. And then in the last little while, you, you've seen a lot more of it.

48It's, it's an interesting question. You know, one would have to ask McCarthy's or Torys how they feel about strong practitioners leaving and setting up their own practices, which in many instances are competitive with them, right? And I think that the answer to that would be mixed. I do think that firms like mine and Lenczner's and Paliare and Stockwoods and other boutiques are very much competitors to the McCarthys, the Torys, the Davies, Oslers for litigation work and the best litigation work. What is interesting is how the market, both within large national firms and boutiques, has sort of moved together. So you'll see boutiques and big firms like McCarthy's collaborating on cases. You'll see them knowledge sharing.

49I mean, I'm collaborating on cases with McCarthy's, and work moves, work moves back and forth. Over the last 10 years, I think I've sent more work to McCarthy's than I've— than that than they've sent to me, which is just, you know, the nature of the pattern. But I do think there's mutual strength and there's mutual benefits. It's— what is interesting is it's very, very unusual for there to be strained relationships when there's a spinoff. It's far more common as it has been in the case with me and McCarthy's and in the case of my other partners and the firms they came from, for there to be a very sort of mature adult relationship that continues and that works well for both.

51Yeah, I wouldn't say mostly pro bono. I do a lot of pro bono. I always make sure we are doing pro bono. I think it's— there's a responsibility to do it generally, but there's also a category of issues that need to get litigated, and if they aren't litigated pro bono, they won't get litigated, and they won't get litigated well. But I would say 95% or 90% of my practice is commercial, and then there's 5 to 10 which are public law or public interest. And then there's a significant component of that that is pro bono. I think it's last year. Yes, last year I did a defamation case, which isn't what you would ordinarily think of as public interest, but because of the nature of the subject matter of was, I thought, public interest.

52And it was a defamation case I did for a lawyer in town, Walied Soliman, who was on the receiving end of some very bad behavior. And that we did pro bono because it needed to be done. So yeah, we're always doing that.

54Yeah.

56Yeah, these were public interest cases because they were cases that were fundamentally about people who espouse an Islamic phobe— Islamophobic, outright white nationalist agenda. And who, as I said in the cases, if you take a look at these characters, they sort of follow a formula. They find a prominent Muslim Canadian who they've never had any contact with and is doing well in whatever their endeavor is— business in the case of Walied Soliman, it was law— and they purport, and they have an online presence and sometimes a very big online presence, right? And they purport to, they style themselves as journalists, and then they purport to have uncovered a plot which would account for these people's success, as if they couldn't be successful being a Muslim and in the case of Mr.

57Fakih, an immigrant, unless they were connected to sinister forces, whether it's the Pakistani Security Service or the, the global caliphate. And then they broadcast this, and when the targets object, they attack them and they attack their lawyers. I became the focus of attacks by some of these folks. And that's a public interest, you know, this kind of behavior really debases our democratic principles, and it's, it's very ugly, and it takes a toll on these people. It takes a toll on their families. They have kids, and social media, being what it is, really has the ability to potentiate or accelerate these efforts, right? And there's an audience out there for it. So that's, that's the public interest in pushing back against this kind of behavior.

58And making people who engage in it accountable.

60Yeah, I don't know how much advice I can give. I can tell you what you're likely to encounter, and just on my own experience, you know, we all have— we all know what the rules are around dealing with self-represented litigants, right? And we all play by those rules. What's significant or notable about this kind of self-represented litigant is they are very practiced at their craft, which is manipulating social media vexing people on social media, including counsel. And there's a really sinister aspect to their, to their conduct. And so it's not the case of a lawyer navigating the typical constraints or challenges of dealing with a self-represented plaintiff who doesn't really know how to navigate the rules.

61These folks have an entirely different set of rules and are completely unconcerned with the rules of practice. And so, you know, counsel becomes the focus of a lot of their attention, and it's all negative. And you got to be prepared to deal with that. It can be, it can be quite unpleasant. So the advice I would give to counsel if they're thinking on thinking about engaging in the space with some of these characters is you should brace yourself to becoming part of the narrative of these folks, right? And that's not always pleasant.

63Well, I acted along with Ken McEwan, who's a terrific counsel in Vancouver. And because Rogers is actually a BC company, right, actually heard in Vancouver. And so that's most of the prep and the workup was done. And then we all went out there and the case was actually argued in Vancouver.

65correct?

68I don't think that— I don't think it's correct, Pulat, to say a higher priority is given to commercial cases than than all other cases. You know, criminal cases rightly draw a lot of resources, family cases too. The idea behind the Commercial Court when it was set up by Justice Farley in the early '90s is that there would be a specialized court that would deal efficiently and quickly with real time, was the idea. Commercial disputes that had significant consequences for stakeholders. So insolvency and restructurings, right, where employees, pensioners, unions, creditors were involved, would be involved, partnership disputes. And so the idea was that there was a category of commercial cases that would— that the administration of justice would benefit from being dealt with in a specialized environment.

69It's grown from, it's grown from there, and at different times different kinds of cases have qualified. You know, franchise cases have been heard on the commercial list, and then it became a list where large, complicated commercial cases that required a lot of case management— not because people weren't getting along, but because they were complicated and a lot of the nitty-gritty or the sand in the gears that could slow a case down on the general list would get hashed out more informally through 930 Chambers and case conferences and that kind of thing. And so over 30 years, it's grown into a court that deals with a lot of complex large cases as well as the cases that are there, you know, as of right, so to speak, like the insolvency and restructuring cases where there has to be real-time ongoing management.

70So it's a case that has worked well. It's been put under a lot of pressure in COVID, and the judges work extremely hard. And I think that it could use more resources than it has, but resources are constrained everywhere, right? With the Jordan Imperative, it's hard to justify allocation of judges to the Commercial List.

73Absolutely not. Absolutely not. The, the opportunities very much there. And what, what folks who think about what they want their practice or their firm to look like in 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 years— I've always thought about my career and the careers of those around me that I'm practicing within 5-year increments. And I always remind myself, the whole market moves together, right? The, the, the, the market of suppliers, which are lawyers, moves together along with the market of buyers, moves together. So if you look around the city you'll see that the market's developing and the people who are identified as leading counsel or stars today have a runway. We all have a runway, right?

74And behind them, people are coming up and there's constant turnover and regeneration. I mean, look at, look at Lenczner Slaght, a terrific firm. Al and Ron are retired and people coming up behind them. The origin of Lenczner Slaght, when they left McCarthy's, it was a huge opportunity for the generation of people behind them, people like Paul Steep and Paul Morrison and others. Same thing is happening generally. If you think of the city or the market as a firm, it's the same thing. It's all moving and people are moving on and will do other things. And at the same time, people behind them are moving up and are getting the benefit of success in their last case and and moving up the grid.

75I always thought that every case I did— and, you know, funnily enough, most of the work I get from referrals are from folks I've done cases against at one time or another— and I always viewed every case as an opportunity to get to know someone, to build a relationship. To establish a rapport, and that's where a lot of work came from. So it's— I think it's very, very far from accurate to say that the market is saturated or static. It's very dynamic. And if you want to develop a commercial list practice, it's very, it's very, very doable. The first thing I say to people when they ask me that is, is ask. Like, identify 3 or 4 people who have a practice that you admire or want to emulate and call them up and, and ask them to think of you for referrals.

76You know, when I left McCarthy's 12 years ago now and went out to, to Lax and A lot of my work came with me, but I still put a lot of effort into going out and speaking to people. And I give this advice to younger lawyers all the time: people like to help you. People, people want to help you. People actually like to be asked for help. So if you want to develop your practice in a particular direction or on a particular court, in a particular court, identify a few counsel and go and speak with them and ask them for help and to refer your cases. It works,

79Yeah,

81You know, I, I, I said to you at the beginning of this discussion that I, I went into law because I had a kind of a romantic notion of being a lawyer, and I still do, actually. I still very much enjoy it. It's a hard job, right? It's hard work. It's, it's hard to do well. And ironically, if you want to get the best cases and want to push the envelope and advance the law, then you got to work harder and harder. It never gets easier. You know, I work harder today than I did as an articling student, and I worked hard. I work harder today than I did as an associate. And so it's got to turn you on.

82You have to find meaning in it. So I think what you're asking me is, you know, where do you find meaning and does the meaning endure and is the meaning still there? You know, very much so. My daughter's a lawyer, third year, I think, or second year. She's a Crown attorney in Brampton. Thought she wanted to be a lawyer like I did. Summered at McCarthy's. Loved the firm, hated Bay Street. Like, didn't think it was— the work was meaningful. Went and did her articles at 720 Bay. Criminal, which was kind of an interesting full circle for me, went and then went into the Crown system, and she's now a Crown in Peel, loves it, finds everything she is doing meaningful, important, and everything I'm doing irrelevant and secondary, right?

83And so it's all about how you find meaning. And so I do think that there's There's no less meaning in it. I think this generation, whatever that means, I think that means young lawyers, do find meaning and do find a romantic notion in it, at least the people I see, and I think it's terrific. There's still the ability to make a real difference in people's lives, whether it's civil or criminal.

85I'd be happy to do that.

87You bet. Take care.