A court challenge by the Canadian Bar Association to force federal and provincial governments to pay for legal aid for "poor people" has failed again.

The association claimed British Columbia's legal aid system was so inadequate that it offended Canada's constitution.

However, the B.C. Court of Appeal upheld a lower court ruling that said legal aid is not a constitutional right.

The bar association, which represents over 35,000 lawyers across Canada, chose B.C. to focus its legal challenge because of dramatic cuts the provincial government made to legal aid in 2002.

But Melina Buckley, one of the bar association's lawyers involved in the aid fight, said many provincial and territorial governments have cut back on helping people in civil court cases and that the group could have launched legal action in several jurisdictions.

Buckley said the association is disappointed with the ruling, but will keep up the fight to ensure it has its day in court.

"There's a real irony in the fact that a case about access to justice is being put through all these hoops."

She said the association will review the court judgment and look at three or four different options to advance the case, including an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.

It may also add individual plaintiffs to the claim, Buckley said.

Adding a plaintiff is one of the suggestions from B.C. Appeal Court Justice Mary Saunders.

"A charter challenge in respect to legal services must be brought in the context of specific facts of an individual's case because not every legal proceeding affecting a person's right requires counsel," Saunders' ruling said.

Buckley said that in the last decade legal aid cuts have been especially harsh on those who can least afford a lawyer.

Although British Columbia once had legal aid clinics across the province and helped about 40,000 people a year, Buckley said almost all of them were closed by the current provincial government in 2002.

She said every jurisdiction in Canada has legal needs that aren't being met, but Ontario and Nova Scotia have recently beefed up their support for poverty law, which refers to the particular legal needs of poor people who may require help with work-related or housing issues, for example.

"The big dramatic change happened in the mid-90s when the federal government changed its method of assisting provinces to pay for civil legal aid."

Buckley said the funding cuts fly in the face of Canada's commitment to equality before the law.

"We think it goes to the core of our constitutional and democratic values."

The bar association argued in the lower court that inadequacies in civil legal aid are especially pronounced in family law, poverty law and immigration and refugee law.

"The most disadvantaged, the most socially excluded within Canada are the ones who are hardest hit by this ... systemic discrimination," Buckley said.

Saunders said the association's claims of a systemic problem violating the constitution don't raise a reasonable claim.

"I see no basis upon which to interfere with the Chief Justice (Donald Brenner's) conclusion on this question," she ruled.

The association also appealed Brenner's order that it pay court costs, claiming the case was a public interest litigation and that the Canadian and British Columbia governments had a greater ability to pay.