Department of Justice Canada
Client Feedback Survey

• [ Previous Page |
• Table of Contents |
• Next Page ]

Annex D – Client Feedback: Litigation Services

The Department represents the Crown in litigation and before administrative tribunals. These activities directly and indirectly support the federal government by defending the Crown’s ability to continue to provide programs, services and benefits to Canadians in the face of court challenges. The table below presents an overview of the Cycle II client feedback provided by the 841 service users who identified that they had received litigation services in the twelve months preceding the administration of the Survey. Presented for comparison purposes are the Cycle I results for litigation services.

Cycle I results for litigation services

Colour-Coding of Results

	Cycle II (2012)	Cycle I (2009)
Overall quality of Litigation Services provided.	8.3 (±0.1) Positive	8.4 (±0.1) Strong

Accessibility/Responsiveness of Legal Services

	Cycle II (2012)	Cycle I (2009)
Official languages: Please rate your overall level of satisfaction with the accessibility of legal services in the official language of your choice. †	9.3 (±0.1) Strong	9.4 (±0.1) Strong
Courteousness/Respectfulness: Please rate your overall level of satisfaction with the courteousness/respectfulness of legal service providers. †	9.0 (±0.1) Strong	9.2 (±0.1) Strong
Service Provider: Please rate your level of satisfaction with the ease with which the correct service provider to meet your needs was identified.	8.5 (±0.1) Strong	n/a
Satisfaction with access mode: Electronic.	8.4 (±0.2) Strong	n/a
Satisfaction with access mode: Telephone.	8.5 (±0.2) Strong	n/a
Satisfaction with access mode: In person.	8.6 (±0.2) Strong	n/a
Regularly provided informative progress reports or ongoing feedback informing you of the status of your request for services.	7.7 (±0.2) Moderate	7.7 (±0.2) Moderate

Usefulness of Legal Services

	Cycle II (2012)	Cycle I (2009)
Fully understood the nature of the problem/issue for which you received assistance. †	8.3 (±0.1) Positive	8.5 (±0.1) Strong
Advised you of issues/developments which may impact your department/agency. †	8.2 (±0.1) Positive	8.4 (±0.1) Strong
Worked with you to identify legal risks.	8.1 (±0.1) Positive	8.2 (±0.1) Positive
Involved you in the review/development of legal options to mitigate identified legal risks.	7.9 (±0.2) Positive	n/a
Involved you in the development of legal strategy and positions.	7.9 (±0.2) Positive	8.0 (±0.2) Positive
Identified means to prevent or resolve legal disputes at the earliest opportunity. †	7.9 (±0.2) Positive	8.3 (±0.2) Positive
Identified opportunities to use dispute resolution practices, where appropriate. †	7.8 (±0.2) Moderate	8.3 (±0.2) Positive
Provided clear and practical guidance on resolving the legal issue.	8.1 (±0.2) Positive	8.2 (±0.1) Positive
Provided consistent legal advice.	8.3 (±0.1) Positive	n/a
If applicable, provided recommendations on whether to appeal or seek judicial review.	8.4 (±0.2) Strong	n/a

Timeliness of Legal Services

	Cycle II (2012)	Cycle I (2009)
Responded in a timely manner to requests for legal services. †	8.1 (±0.1) Positive	8.4 (±0.1) Strong
Negotiated mutually agreed-upon deadlines. †	7.8 (±0.2) Moderate	8.3 (±0.1) Positive
Met mutually agreed-upon deadlines. †	8.0 (±0.2) Positive	8.3 (±0.2) Positive

† Denotes a statistically significant difference between Cycle II and Cycle I client feedback.

In assessing the overall quality of the litigation services provided, overall client satisfaction has decreased slightly since Cycle I, resulting in a “positive” rating of 8.3 on a 10-point scale. Against the additional twenty elements relating to litigation services, the Department is generally in line with or surpassing the target of 8.0.

There are three specific elements where the client feedback was “moderate” – falling slightly below the established target. Specifically, these include:

• regularly provided informative progress reports or ongoing feedback informing you of the status of your request for services;
• identified opportunities to use dispute resolution practices, where appropriate; and,
• negotiated mutually agreed-upon deadlines.

Although the Cycle II findings are largely consistent with the feedback collected during Cycle I, there have been notable decreases in the ratings of the following three elements:

• identified means to prevent or resolve legal disputes at the earliest opportunity;
• identified opportunities to use dispute resolution practices, where appropriate; and,
• negotiated mutually agreed-upon deadlines.

• [ Previous Page |
• Table of Contents |
• Next Page ]