Fair enough bcnorth. I was not really pressing for an apology, but you just seemed a tad quick on the trigger to take issue with what I considered to be fairly innocuous comments. I am not altogether immune to the same weakness from time to time, so I cannot be too critical of you on that score.
You are right about the Law Society offering the PLTC yearly, but it is not open to lawyers. It is part of the training of new lawyers, in conjunction with articling. Ongoing training for lawyers falls primarily to the Continuing Legal Education Society of B.C. All lawyers in the province must enroll in a minimum number of courses each year. CLE also publishes in all areas of the law, so lawyers always have fresh material available to study. I am sure that most of it is available to non-lawyers as well, if they have the interest and are willing to pay for the materials.
For myself, I have never really practiced family law, at least not since I was a young buck first at the bar, with little choice but to take on all files that came through the door. But I am very familiar with the new statute and case law due to my current employment, here in BC. I also worked in the US for a few years, as an advisor on one or two somewhat esoteric areas of the law, with cross-border issues involved.
Lei, you asked:
My question, if a foreigner died in the Philippines while on vacation and has no resources and no family or family is not obligated to pay for the expenses to repatriate cremate bury the body, why should we poor Filipinos have the burden of having to deal/pay for it. Now that reminds me to see the city government/official for help/advice as you could be right, the Austrian or Canadian government might not be able to help. But if this happened in my hometown in the province, with or without death certificate, out of respect, we are going to bury the dead. It's sad and an outrage that a dead body should be kept hostage due to lack of money or unable to pay his bills.
I suppose you raise an interesting question of international comity. Should it be the case that "rich" countries must pay for the foibles of their citizens/permanent residents abroad in "poor" countries? How should "rich" and "poor" be defined? What expenses should be covered? Medical bills? To what extent? Funerals? Unpaid hotel/accommodation bills? What level of proof should be required to show indigence on the part of the person whose bills are sought to be compensated? Should someone be able to call an embassy and simply report such and such to be the case and the money comes jingling down the chute? Does the rich country send an investigator? Such vexing questions! Let's go further and posit that a citizen of a rich country murders the head of a family in a poor country. Should the rich country compensate the poor family for the criminal/tortious acts of its citizen? How far should we extend vicarious liability?
Edited by Steve: Fixed the quote...
