Assistance in presenting Charter arguments

• Spracklin v. Kichton [2001] A.J. No. 990 (Q.B.) The issue in this case was whether the interests of justice demanded that the province assist the plaintiff by covering the cost of representation on a Charter challenge. In concluding that the plaintiff should be provided with state-funded counsel, the court held at para. 82, “This is not a situation where a trial can proceed with the Trial Judge giving technical assistance to an unrepresented litigant, as discussed in Rain, McGibbon, Romanowicz, or Wood. The general principle in such cases is characterized as the Judge giving a “helping hand” to allow the position of the accused to have its full force and effect. By comparison, a judicial effort to assist Spracklin to put forward a Charter challenge here to its full force and effect could well be regarded as an affront to justice. It would not be fair to Spracklin, inasmuch as the Judge could not tell her what to think or say, or what evidence to call, or why, or to what purpose. Expert evidence is expected here. It would not be fair to Kichton. It would not be fair to Alberta, not because the Judge would necessarily become an adversary to Alberta but due to the seriously distracting effect of the Judge being both a form of advocate and the Judge, it would not look like justice to a reasonable observer.”

However, there is some indication that directing the unrepresented party in how to go about presenting or bringing forward a Charter proceeding may be permissible. See Steemson v. British Columbia, [2002] B.C.J. No. 388 (B.C.S.C.)