What is the consequence of a disagreement between counsel and client at a personal injury trial?

The fact that the disagreement between counsel and his client arose after the proceedings commenced surely is not conclusive of the matter. In my view, the accused man had the right to discharge his counsel if he wished to do so and proceed without him or as advised: see Rondel v. Worsley, [1969] 1 A.C. 191 at pp. 241 and 260. In any event, I think it is fundamental in our law that the accused man has this right. Indeed, in criminal cases the Criminal Code recognizes that the accused can proceed either with or without counsel. Reference need only be made to ss. 557 and 709(2) [now ss. 577 and 737(2)] where this is abundantly clear.