There you go "some judges unable or unwilling to impose control of the proceedings in their court".   That is maybe one third of the problem - ridiculous behaviour, stalling by defense counsel, non-disclosure by the prosecution, and so on, with judges unwilling to crack the whip.  But I would argue that the really fundamental thing is decades of moronic rulings by Charter-friendly judges, and similar laws from Parliament, all designed to bias proceedings in favour of the defense.  Maybe we have grossly over-reacted to the Donald Marshalls of the world, maybe lawyers are naive and want to believe people are good (YEP!), but the burden of proof is way up there.  In financial cases especially, it could be obvious to a blind hippopotamous that the bad guys stole the money, but dopey judges insist that "intent" be shown!  In criminal cases, the parallels are intent and maybe sanity.  Days of court wasted arguing about the mental state of somebody who should not get out ever, anyway!!