Weekly Proceedings Update
Documents posted this week and hearings scheduled for next week – updated every Friday.
Scroll through for summaries of previous weeks.
- 13/12/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
James Robert Arnold, Lawyer (Waterloo)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on December 12, 2024.
Rocco Kusi Achampong, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on December 12, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Vincenzo Piruzza, Paralegal (Windsor)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 16, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Marc Gilles Joseph Gauthier, avocat (Hawkesbury)
Une audience de motion pour une suspension ou une restriction interlocutoire est prévue pour le 17 decembre 2024 à 10 h.
Andrew Gordon Rogerson, Lawyer (Barrie)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on December 17, 2024 at 1:30 p.m.
Mitchell Worsoff, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on December 18, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Gregory Edward Brant Castellano, Lawyer (Shannonville)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on December 19, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Harold Joseph Murphy, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 19, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Jenna Schroeder, Lawyer (McDonalds Corners)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 20, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Julian J Hutchinson, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Hutchinson's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Diamond engaged in professional misconduct by marketing legal services in a manner that is likely to mislead, confuse or deceive, and/or which is not demonstrably true, accurate, and verifiable, and/or which is not consistent with a high standard of professionalism, improperly marketing second opinion services, and advertising specialization in the absence of specialist certification. A reprimand is ordered, along with $40,000 in costs to the Law Society.
George Socrates Florentis, Lawyer (Sudbury)
Mr. Florentis engaged in professional misconduct by improperly withdrawing client funds from trust, receiving and accepting more than $7,500 in cash in relation to a client file, failing to maintain proper books and records, and receiving and accepting cash for services not yet rendered and failing to deposit those funds in trust . He has been granted permission to surrender his licence, failing which it will be revoked. He is also ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Wayne Andrew Chorney, Lawyer (Sault Ste. Marie)
Mr. Chorney's proceeding is converted to an Invitation to Attend.
Jay Rudolph Bradley, Paralegal (Owen Sound)
Mr. Bradley engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for two months after that. If he has not co-operated by March 6, 2025, a $2,000 fine is ordered. He is also ordered to pay $4,144 in costs to the Law Society.
Bruce Gordon Joseph Moquin, Paralegal (Casselman)
Mr. Moquin engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations. A $2,000 fine is ordered, along with a conditional $2,000 fine if he has not co-operated by January 6, 2025. He is also ordered to pay $2,244 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Ari Benjamin Kulidjian, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Kulidjian received notice but did not participate, and the panel proceeded in his absence. He had previously been suspended. Mr. Kulidjian was found to have engaged in professional misconduct by practising while suspended, swearing a false affidavit or making false billings, arranging for a non-licensee to practise while he was suspended, agreeing to a settlement that purported to prohibit the complainant from proceeding with the Law Society’s investigation, and failing to co-operate. The Tribunal was directed to schedule a hearing on penalty and costs.
Alisa Mazo, Lawyer (Toronto)
The hearing panel earlier granted Ms. Mazo's adjournment request on terms that she be suspended on an interlocutory basis. She retained new counsel and requested that the earlier order be terminated. The order was varied to allow Ms. Mazo to represent three clients in upcoming matters in December 2024 and January 2025. A schedule was set for pre-hearing disclosure and motions, and the merits hearing was scheduled to begin on March 17, 2025.
Kerlan Garfield McLean, Paralegal (Mississauga)
The panel accepted Mr. McLean's admissions regarding the professional misconduct. The panel found that the jointly submitted two-month suspension would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute. Mr. McLean was suspended for two months, starting November 1, 2024 and ordered to pay costs of $8,000.
David Simoes Malgueiro Campos, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Campos brought a motion seeking that evidence from his prior hearing be ordered not-public, along with an anonymization order. The panel was not persuaded that the availability of the affidavits to individuals who wished to examine them posed a serious risk to an important public interest. The panel ordered a publication ban in respect of two affidavits marked as exhibits at the hearing.
Michael Andrew Weinczok, Lawyer (Vancouver, B.C.)
The Law Society alleged that Mr. Weinczok failed to administer an estate properly and failed to co-operate. Mr. Weinczok did not respond to the Law Society’s request to admit and was deemed to admit the allegations. He did not participate in the hearing and the panel proceeded in his absence. He was found to have engaged in conduct unbecoming in his role as estate trustee, as he breached many of his duties, including failing to notify or provide funds to beneficiaries, withdrawing funds for his own benefit without authorization, and failing to keep records. He was also found to have failed to co-operate with the Law Society’s investigation. In order to provide some incentive to complete the administration of the estate, which had not been completed for 16 years, the panel ordered an indefinite suspension followed by a four-month suspension, a fine of $5,000 and an additional fine of $5,000 if conditions were not met, and costs of $38,668.
Ronald Ori Davidovic, Lawyer (Sunrise, FL)
Mr. Davidovic was convicted of conspiracy to commit fraud in the United States. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission on penalty and costs and ordered his licence revoked immediately. Costs of $1,000 were ordered.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
An earlier panel found, and Mr. Diamond admitted, that he had engaged in professional misconduct in how he and his firm marketed legal services. Mr. Diamond successfully appealed the earlier panel’s decision that the Chair need not recuse himself from the panel, and as a result, a new hearing panel heard submissions on penalty and costs. The panel found that a reprimand, as jointly submitted, would not lead a well-informed member of the public to conclude that the sanction was so unhinged from the relevant circumstances so as to indicate that the system of professional regulation had broken down. Mr. Diamond was to be reprimanded and was ordered to pay $40,000 in costs.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Brampton)
Ms. Deokaran brought a motion requesting that she not be required to file transcripts of oral evidence in order to perfect her appeal. She argued that the appeal was based on the reasons for decision and that transcripts were not required. The panel ordered that limited transcripts relevant to the appeal be filed in accordance with the deadlines in the Tribunal's rules. Costs were reserved to the appeal panel.
- 06/12/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Any Mayer, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on December 5, 2024.
Gurpreet Singh, Lawyer Applicant (Brampton)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on November 29, 2024.
Gregory John Willoughby, Lawyer (London)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 2, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Winfield Edward Corcoran, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 9, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Richard Craig Anthony Patterson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 9, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
George Socrates Florentis, Lawyer (Sudbury)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 9, 2024 at 1:30 p.m.
Georgiana Stefania Masgras-Irshidat, Lawyer (Kitchener)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 10, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Wayne Andrew Chorney, Lawyer (Sault Ste. Marie)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 12, 2024 at 9:00 a.m.
David Mark Marcovitch, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings (23H-111 & 22H-107) will be held on December 13, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Timothy Michael Kinnaird, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 13, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Demitry Papasotiriou-Lanteigne, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 13, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Fariborz Haghighat Jou, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Jou engaged in professional misconduct by failing to comply with court orders, failing to practice with honour and integrity, failing to treat the court with candour and honesty, improperly withdrawing money from trust, charging excessive or improper fees and disbursements and failing to maintain books and records. His licence is revoked. He is ordered to pay $46,800 to a client, failing which he must repay the Compensation Fund any amount paid by the fund to a maximum of $46,8000. He is also ordered to pay $28,177.50 in costs to the Law Society.
Michael Andrew Weinczok, Lawyer (Vancouver, B.C.)
Mr. Weinczok engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation, and conduct unbecoming a licensee when acting as an estate trustee. His licence is suspended until he has completed the estate administration, and for four months after that, and he is ordered to pay a $5,000 fine, and a further $5,000 fine if he has not completed the estate administration within six months. He is also ordered to pay $38,668 in costs to the Law Society.
Adelin-Bogdan Mocanu, Paralegal (Concord)
Mr. Mocanu engaged in professional misconduct by failing to serve a client to the standard of a competent paralegal. His licence is suspended for one month, and he is ordered to complete three extra hours of professional development. He is also ordered to pay $2,500 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Philip Ugochukwu Okpala, Lawyer (Oakville)
The Law Society brought a motion asking for an interlocutory suspension of Mr. Okpala's licence to practise law. Mr. Okpala did not oppose the motion. The panel found that there was compelling evidence that Mr. Okpala has misapplied, mishandled or misappropriated approximately $1,850,000 in client trust funds relating to 18 real estate deposits for a builder, where he also served as director, principal and solicitor, and for two real estate clients where he acted on the sale of a property. As there were reasonable grounds for believing there is a significant risk of harm to the public and to the public interest in the administration of justice, Mr. Okpala's licence was suspended on an interlocutory basis.
- 29/11/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Francesco Salvatore Bernard Alfano, Paralegal (Hamilton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 28, 2024.
Nitasha Azhar Malik, Paralegal (Scarborough)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 27, 2024.
Shengmin Pei, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 27, 2024.
Sharndeep Singh, Lawyer Applicant (Brampton)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on November 27, 2024.
Jorge Lopez, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 27, 2024.
Dennis Kashmeel Keevantoza McKöena, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on November 27, 2024.
Stephen George Reynolds, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 26, 2024.
Mitchell Worsoff, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on November 26, 2024.
Thomas Joseph Meehan, Lawyer (Guelph)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 26, 2024.
Robin John Koshy, Lawyer (Timmins)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 22, 2024.
Clarke Austin Merritt, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 22, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Brian Anderson Callender, Lawyer (Kingston)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 4 & 5, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Jay Rudolph Bradley, Paralegal (Owen Sound)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 6, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Patrick James Michael Louch, Lawyer (Haliburton)
Mr. Louch engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with four Law Society investigations. A reprimand is ordered, along with $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Alisa Mazo, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Mazo's interlocutory suspension is varied.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The panel earlier found that Ms. Deokaran had engaged in numerous and serious incidents of professional misconduct involving clients, opposing counsel, Legal Aid Ontario and courts. The panel found that the misconduct was very serious, involved integrity, that it went on for over a decade, that there was a history of prior discipline findings, and that it had real and serious consequences for others. The panel determined that revocation was the appropriate penalty given the cumulative impact of Ms. Deokaran's dishonesty and breaches of integrity. Costs of $10,000 were ordered in light of the complexity of the case and Ms. Deokaran's conduct, which complicated and lengthened the proceeding, as well as wasted the preparation time of LSO staff.
Dennis Kashmeel Keevantoza McKöena, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Having earlier found that Mr. McKöena engaged in professional misconduct by misrepresenting himself as a current officer of the Canadian Armed Forces and failing to report to the Law Society that he had been charged for falsely representing himself as a public officer, the panel considered submissions on penalty and costs. Mr. McKöena did not provide evidence to connect the misconduct with his disability and family status such as to require an accommodation to the point of undue hardship. The misconduct was serious and continued for an extended period. Mr. McKöena had no disciplinary history. The panel decided to suspend him for four months and ordered a $2,500 fine and $30,000 in costs over five years, starting in 2025.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (York)
The Hearing Division had found that Mr. Robson had engaged in serious professional misconduct involving humiliating and intimidating comments to other lawyers and personal attacks against judges as a form of retribution. It revoked his licence and awarded costs of $94.991.85. Mr. Robson appealed but failed to perfect his appeal by the deadline. Despite his lack of demonstrated intention to appeal or convincing explanation for his delay, the justice of the case was determinative, as the panel could not find that there was so little merit to deny the right of appeal of a finding that resulted in the revocation of his licence. The panel granted the motion to allow an extension until January 2, 2025 to perfect the appeal on a peremptory basis. No costs were ordered.
- 22/11/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Syeda Khadija Marghoob, Lawyer Applicant (Richmond Hill)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on November 19, 2024.
Rocco Kusi Achampong, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 19, 2024.
Antonio Caruso, Paralegal (Niagara Falls)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on November 18, 2024.
Marc Gilles Joseph Gauthier, avocat (Hawkesbury)
Un avis de motion pour une suspension ou une restriction interlocutoire a été déposé le 15 novembre, 2024
Mariam Qureshi, Paralegal (Bradford)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 14, 2024.
Rupinder Garcha, Lawyer (Oakville)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 14, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Brampton)
A motion within an appeal by the licensee will be heard on November 25, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Julian J Hutchinson, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on November 26, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Fariborz Haghighat Jou, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 27, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
John William McDonald, Lawyer (Cambridge)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on November 27, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Andrew Gordon Rogerson, Lawyer (Barrie)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on November 29, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Alisa Mazo, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Mazo's request for adjournment is granted. Her licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis.
Michael Israel Rappaport, Lawyer (Ottawa)
The panel orders that Mr. Rappaport will pay $8,610 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Sebastien Gauthier, Paralegal (Ottawa)
Mr. Gauthier did not participate in the hearing, which took place in his absence. He did not respond to five letters and a telephone message. This was the third time the Tribunal had found that Mr. Gauthier committed professional misconduct for lack of co-operation. The panel concluded that he was ungovernable, and so his licence was revoked and $6,617.50 in costs was ordered.
William Francis Murray, Lawyer (Ottawa)
The Law Society alleged that Mr. Murray failed to act with integrity in the handling of $2,000 provided by his client’s friend for bail, in proposing cash bail, and in assaulting the client’s friend and a staff person of Mr. Murphy's tenant. The panel found that the allegation of failing to act with integrity was established, but not the other allegations. A penalty and costs hearing is to be scheduled.
Shahryar Mazaheri & Frederick Allen Yack, Lawyers (Toronto)
Mr. Mazaheri and Mr. Yack acted in transactions in which AP was alleged to have been defrauded. Mr. Yack consented to an interlocutory suspension; Mr. Mazaheri did not. Mr. Mazaheri did not dispute that a fraud occurred, only that he had actual or constructive knowledge of the fraud. No direct evidence was adduced at the motion hearing. The panel found that the evidence it received was almost entirely hearsay and not tested by way of cross-examination. The panel concluded that there were reasonable grounds for believing that there was a significant risk of harm to members of the public, and that that Mr. Mazaheri and Mr. Yack would not honour their professional obligations to avoid assisting in fraud and to ensure proper use of trust monies. Mr. Mazaheri and Mr. Yack were suspended on an interlocutory basis with costs reserved to the panel hearing any eventual conduct proceeding.
David Timothy Starr, Lawyer (Guelph)
Mr. Starr did not attend the hearing and was deemed to admit certain facts as a result of his failure to respond to the Law Society’s Request to Admit. Mr. Starr was found to have engaged in professional misconduct by sexually harassing two employees, receiving sums of cash from a client exceeding the amounts allowed by the By-Laws, and assisting a client in dishonest conduct, including by using his trust account for purposes unrelated to legal services, drawing on trust funds held for other clients, and proposing a scheme to launder money for this client. Mr. Starr's licence was revoked, as he did not oppose the proposed penalty, financial dishonesty was involved and there was no evidence of mitigating factors. Costs of $15,000 were also ordered.
Vivek Nijhawan, Lawyer Applicant (Ottawa)
Mr. Nijhawan's licence was revoked in 2008 after a panel found that he had engaged in serious professional misconduct, including dishonest and fraudulent conduct to obtain mortgage funds in 21 real estate transactions. He unsuccessfully applied for re-licensing in 2012 and now re-applies. The panel found that Mr. Nijhawan did not meet his burden of establishing on the balance of probabilities, through fresh material evidence or a change in circumstances, that he is presently of good character. The panel dismissed the application. Costs were not requested and no order was made.
Charles Michael Cooke, Lawyer (Thornhill)
A review of Mr. Cooke's financial records showed that on multiple occasions he transferred client trust funds to his personal bank accounts. The records also showed that his trust account had been in overdraft. Mr. Cooke failed to keep trust bank reconciliations and he did not complete signed electronic trust transfers. His receipts and disbursements journal also did not contain all of the information required in By-Law 9. The panel found that he had misappropriated funds and failed to maintain the required books and records. A hearing on penalty and costs will be scheduled.
- 2024-11-15
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Mariam Qureshi, Paraelgal (Bradford)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 14, 2024.
Xiao Yang Wang, Paralegal Applicant (Windsor)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on November 13, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Georgiana Stefania Masgras-Irshidat, Lawyer (Kitchener)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 18, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Jenna Schroeder, Lawyer (McDonalds Corners)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 18 & 19, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Adam Estabrooks, Paralegal Applicant (Timmins)
A licensing hearing will be held on November 20, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Gregory Edward Brant Castellano, Lawyer (Shannonville)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on November 21, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
David Mark Marcovitch, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings (23H-111 & 22H-107) will be held on November 22, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Sang-Kyun Suh, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society's appeal is dismissed except for the order of costs against the Law Society. Mr. Suh is ordered to pay the Law Society a total of $25,000 in costs.
Shahryar Mazaheri, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Mazaheri's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Vivek Nijhawan, Lawyer Applicant (Ottawa)
Mr. Nijhawan's licensing application is refused.
Antonio Caruso, Paralegal (Niagara Falls)
The panel orders that Mr. Caruso will pay $14,300 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Waqas Amjad, Paralegal (Mississauga)
The Law Society brought a motion for an interlocutory suspension of Mr. Amjad's licence. After being terminated from employment, Mr. Amjad was alleged to have solicited clients of his former firm to do work outside his permitted scope of practice. After the firm sent a cease-and-desist letter, Mr. Amjad harassed law firm staff by phone and email and made discriminatory and threatening social media posts. He was later admitted to hospital for psychiatric treatment. The panel found that the test for an interlocutory suspension was met, as there were reasonable grounds for believing that there was a significant risk of harm to members of the public. The panel ordered an interlocutory suspension of Mr. Amjad's licence.
Antonio Caruso, Paralegal (Niagara Falls)
A panel member had voluntarily withdrawn from hearing the merits of an application but had heard and decided related motions. Costs for the motion hearing had to be determined. Mr. Caruso objected to the participation of the panel member in the costs decision, arguing that he had withdrawn and could not return, and also on the basis of reasonable apprehension of bias. The voluntary withdrawal from the merits hearing panel did not mean that the panel member withdrew from the motion panel. The panel found that reasonable apprehension of bias was not established and further, that the recusal request was not timely. The panel member will participate in the determination of the costs of the motion hearing.
Antonio Caruso, Paralegal (Niagara Falls)
The Law Society sought costs of about $14,300 in relation to two motions: a motion to quash Mr. Caruso's numerous summonses and a motion by Mr. Caruso to dismiss the application. Mr. Caruso also requested costs. The Tribunal made determinations adverse to Mr. Caruso in both motions. Considering the factors in assessing costs such as complexity and conduct of the parties, the panel found that the Law Society’s reduced request for costs was reasonable. The panel also found that Mr. Caruso's conduct lengthened the proceeding and made it more difficult. The panel also determined that Mr. Caruso did not show that the Law Society caused costs to be incurred without reasonable cause or to be wasted by undue delay and denied his request for costs. The panel ordered costs of $14,300 to be paid immediately.
Sang-Kyun Suh, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society appealed from the hearing panel’s dismissal of part of the conduct application as well as from the award of costs. The appeal panel found no error in the hearing panel’s analysis of MT’s and KT’s evidence. The hearing panel was entitled to make the findings that it did regarding credibility and the implausibility of the complaints. However, the hearing panel committed a palpable and overriding error when it offset the Law Society’s costs as a result of concluding that the proceedings in regards to MT and KT were unwarranted. The hearing panel did not explain how the Law Society ought to have assessed its case differently prior to the hearing. The hearing panel’s conclusions were reached only after hearing the evidence and cross-examination of the witnesses. The appeal was dismissed except for the appeal of the hearing panel’s order of costs against the Law Society, which was granted.
- 08/11/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Alexander Palacios, Paraelgal (Pickering)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 7, 2024.
Julian J Hutchinson, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on November 4, 2024.
Dwayne Osalavan Kinkead, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 4, 2024.
Nahid Rahimi, Paralegal (North York)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on November 1, 2024.
Ahmad Nabil Shariq, Lawyer Applicant (Guelph)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on October 31, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
John Jules David Somjen, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held from November 13-15, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
David Robert Gorman, Lawyer (Swastika)
Mr. Gorman engaged in professional misconduct by three times misappropriating funds, and failing to report two criminal charges to the Law Society. He also engaged in conduct unbecoming by committing three criminal offences. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $13,520 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Olena Manoilo, Paralegal Applicant (Chatham)
Ms. Manoilo had pled guilty to theft and fraud in relation to bank cards that she had found and used. She completed her probation and paid restitution. The panel found that she was not presently of good character based on the seriousness of the misconduct and their finding that she had not shown that she had accepted responsibility for her actions. The application was dismissed and no costs were ordered.
Kaili Rachelle Horney, Paralegal (Windsor)
The panel determined that there were reasonable grounds to believe that Ms. Horney misappropriated funds from her employer. The evidence put Ms. Horney's honesty and integrity into question and, if the allegations were established, would render her liable to a substantial penalty, and so her licence was suspended on an interlocutory basis.
Martin Christopher Schulz, Lawyer (Mississauga)
In the context of his motion for a permanent stay based on abuse of process, Mr. Schulz indicated that he wished to call former LSO’s legal representative as a witness. The Tribunal ordered that the issue be heard as a motion by the LSO to quash Mr. Schulz's request to examine its former counsel as a witness. The panel found that Mr. Schulz did not meet his burden of showing that LSO former counsel was in a position to offer relevant evidence or that the examination would be conducted on a relevant issue. The panel granted the LSO’s motion to quash. Costs of the motion were left to the panel hearing Mr. Schulz's stay motion or, if this did not proceed, to the panel hearing the merits.
Jesse Lee James Valkenier, Paralegal (Brockville)
Mr. Valkenier was alleged to have failed to co-operate with the Law Society’s investigation for a second time. He was previously suspended indefinitely pending compliance, followed by a one-month suspension. He did not contest the allegation and the parties agreed on $3,500 in costs, but the requested fine and penalty were in dispute. The panel rejected the LSO request for a fine, as a suspension was more appropriate in the circumstances of this case. The panel also rejected Mr. Valkenier's request to provide a definite suspension before an indefinite one, as it would not be consistent with other cases and would not provide any incentive for faster compliance. The panel ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance, followed by a definite two-month suspension, both of which would take effect at the conclusion of previous suspensions. Mr. Valkenier was also ordered to pay $3,500 in costs.
Ranjit Singh Gill, Paralegal (Cambridge)
Mr. Gill was retained by two clients while his licence was suspended by Tribunal orders. The panel found that he had provided both clients with legal services while suspended. The panel also found that he impersonated a client when he sent an email to and called the Provincial Offences Office. A hearing on penalty and costs is to be scheduled.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
The appeal panel found that there was no error in principle in the hearing panel’s reasons and no basis upon which to conclude that the hearing panel’s costs award was plainly wrong. The appeal panel also upheld the hearing panel’s order for repayment of future sums paid by the Compensation Fund to a maximum of $100,000.
- 01/11/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Gregory Edward Brant Castellano, Lawyer (Shannonville)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on October 30, 2024.
Bruce Gordon Joseph Moquin, Paralegal (Casselman)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 29, 2024.
Natasha Eleen Stewart, Lawyer Applicant (Brampton)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on October 25, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Giuseppe Jr. Campisi, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Peter Ian Murray, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings will be held from November 5-7, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
David Robert Gorman, Lawyer (Swastika)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 7, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Brampton)
A motion within an appeal by the licensee will be heard on November 7, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Dennis Kashmeel Keevantoza McKöena, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. McKöena engaged in professional misconduct by failing to conduct himself with honour and integrity and failing to report to the Law Society in a timely manner that he had been charged with committing a criminal offence. His licence is suspended for four months, he is ordered to pay a $2,500 fine, and he is ordered to pay $30,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Barnwell's appeal is dismissed.
Philip Ugochukwu Okpala, Lawyer (Oakville)
Mr. Okpala's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Jesse Lee James Valkenier, Paralegal (Brockville)
Mr. Valkenier engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with four Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for two months after that, and he is ordered to pay $3,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Olena Manoilo, Paralegal Applicant (Chatham)
Ms. Manoilo is not presently of good character, and so her licensing application is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Coe Hill)
Mr. McMackin misappropriated funds from six clients. He also failed to make court-ordered support payments, failed to maintain books and records and failed to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. The matter proceeded on a joint submission and Mr. McMackin admitted that he engaged in the professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming as alleged. His licence was revoked and he was ordered to pay restitution, as well as costs of $6,055.
Victor Wall, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Wall was used as a dupe in an attempted fraudulent transaction. The panel found that he was not alert to numerous red flags in the transaction. He improperly held funds in trust for his client that were not related to the provision of legal services, and he did not have proper controls in place for his trust account to prevent an erroneous transfer. Mr. Wall was the executor of an estate where the deceased died in 2006 and the estate was still not completely administered by 2019; the final tax return was not completed until 2023. Mr. Wall had been practising for 47 years and had no discipline history, and he was co-operative with the investigator and in the hearing. He entered into an Agreed Statement of Fact and the parties made joint submissions on penalty and costs. The panel accepted the joint submission as satisfying the public interest test, and so Mr. Wall was was suspended for three months commencing October 7, 2024, and was ordered to pay costs of $7,500.
Cosimo Vecchiarelli, Lawyer (Vaughan)
Mr. Vacchiarelli entered an Agreed Statement of Fact and admitted that he engaged in professional misconduct by communicating directly with a former client while that client was represented by another licensee, breaching confidentiality owed to his current client, and acting in a conflict of interest. The parties did not agree on penalty. The panel ordered a 30-day suspension beginning two weeks from the date of the order. Costs in the amount of $3,500 were agreed upon and ordered.
Gregory Charles Hertzberger, Lawyer (Kitchener)
The Law Society brought a motion for interlocutory suspension of Mr. Hertzberger's licence. Mr. Hertzberger had deposited large-value cheques into his trust account and disbursed the funds, but the cheques were fraudulent. He had not verified the client’s identity or other information as required. The panel found that there was no reason to believe that Mr. Hertzberger had actual or constructive knowledge of the fraud. It determined that an interlocutory suspension was not appropriate, but that Mr. Hertzberger's licence should be subject to restrictions. It ordered that he should not be permitted to operate a trust account pending disposition of the investigation and any resulting conduct application.
John Paul McLaughlin, Lawyer (Oakville)
Mr. McLaughlin had been found to have engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with the Law Society’s investigation. On appeal, the appeal panel found that the hearing panel did not breach procedural fairness in its denial of his adjournment request, did not err in its finding that Mr. McLaughlin failed to co-operate, and did not impose an unfit penalty, as it imposed the penalty provided in the Rules. The panel dismissed the appeal and invited written submissions on costs.
- 25/10/2025
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Kwok Keung Ngan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 22, 2024.
Maria Louisa L. Diaz, Lawyer (Markham)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 21, 2024.
Samuel K. A. Osei, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on October 18, 2024.
Glenn Patrick Bogue, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 18, 2024.
Patrick James Michael Louch, Lawyer (Haliburton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 18, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Dennis Kashmeel Keevantoza McKöena, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 28, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Richard Keith Watson, Lawyer (Toronto)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on October 29, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Philip Ugochukwu Okpala, Lawyer (Oakville)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on October 30, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
John Paul McLaughlin, Lawyer (Oakville)
Mr. McLaughlin's appeal is dismissed.
Kerlan Garfield McLean, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Mr. McLean engaged in professional misconduct by failing to immediately deposit money received in trust, failing to account to his client and failing to serve his client. His licence is suspended for two months, and he is ordered to pay $8,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Rabah Yaacoub Moubarak, Lawyer (Vaughan)
In the context of allegations of professional misconduct involving sexual harassment, the parties entered into an agreed statement of facts (ASF) as well as a joint submission on penalty and costs. Mr. Moubarak brought a motion seeking to resile from the ASF on the basis that it was not voluntary or informed and that it would result in a miscarriage of justice. The panel dismissed the motion, finding that Mr. Moubarak did not establish that the ASF should be set aside. It ordered that if the Law Society relied on the ASF at the merits hearing of this application and professional misconduct was found by the hearing panel, the LSO must honour the previously agreed penalty and costs submission. The panel invited submissions on costs.
Richard Craig Anthony Patterson, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society alleged that Mr. Patterson failed to act with integrity in the handling of the trust account of a revoked licensee, or in the alternative, to have acted contrary to the by-laws in depositing and withdrawing funds from trust accounts he controlled. Mr. Patterson had taken over a revoked lawyer’s trust account and approximately 250 client files. He made an agreement with the revoked lawyer regarding the client files, but the panel found that he was operating as a trustee rather than providing legal services. It determined that he breached the by-laws in how he dealt with funds in the trust accounts, but that it was not established that he acted without integrity. The panel also determined that that no racial discrimination was established. The motion for a stay was dismissed, and the panel directed the Tribunal to schedule a penalty and costs hearing.
- 18/10/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Vanessa Anne Ibe, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 16, 2024.
Jay Rudolph Bradley, Paralegal (Owen Sound)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 15, 2024.
Amber Rita Anne Herman, Lawyer (Markham)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 11, 2024.
Connor David O'Hare, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 11, 2024.
Eric Paul Polten, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 11, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Kerlan Garfield McLean, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 21, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Michael Andrew Weinczok, Lawyer (Vancouver, B.C.)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 23, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Brian Anderson Callender, Lawyer (Kingston)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 24 & 25, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Abba Emmanuel Chima, Lawyer (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 24 & 25, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Jesse Lee James Valkenier, Paralegal (Brockville)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on October 25, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Robert Anthony Watson, Lawyer (Burlington)
Mr. Watson engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for two months after that. He is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine, and a further $2,000 fine if he has not co-operated by January 31, 2025. He is also ordered to pay $2,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Nahid Rahimi, Paralegal (North York)
The panel earlier found that Ms. Rahimi acted without integrity and breached client confidences. There were also various other lesser offences including failure to serve, failure to deposit funds into trust and practising out of scope and in an improper business structure. The merits hearing was complex and protracted, covering a broad spectrum of allegations. The Law Society withdrew 19 allegations during the hearing and proved approximately one-third of the 61 remaining allegations. The panel concluded that revocation was appropriate where the integrity of the legal professions are at stake. Revocation was required to protect potential clients as well as the public confidence in the trustworthiness of the paralegal profession. Ms. Rahimi's licence was therefore revoked, and she was ordered to pay $10,000 in costs over five years.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
Having earlier found that Mr. Bush engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with an investigation, the panel considered submissions on penalty. Following the finding of misconduct, Mr. Bush undertook not to provide legal services until a neuropsychological assessment could be undertaken and the penalty hearing completed. The undertaking remained in place for about 15 months. The panel ordered a three-month suspension, to be served retroactively, and ordered Mr. Bush to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Melanie Gloria Christine Zopf, Paralegal (Scarborough)
Ms. Zopf's licence had previously been suspended since December 2017. During that time she worked as a law clerk at a law firm from January 2020 to December 2022. She had previously been suspended for conduct unbecoming and professional misconduct, including integrity issues and similar conduct involving working for law firms while suspended. Ms. Zopf initially participated in the proceedings and then indicated that she would no longer respond, so the panel proceeded in her absence. The panel concluded that Ms. Zopf misled her employer regarding her suspension, breached the Guidelines by working for the firm while suspended, and failed to co-operate with the Law Society. The panel determined that she was ungovernable and revoked her licence. Costs of $10,000 were also ordered.
- 11/10/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Joyann Vallane Oliver, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 8, 2024.
Philip Ugochukwu Okpala, Lawyer (Oakville)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on October 7, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Martin Christopher Schulz, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 15, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Antonio Agozzino, Lawyer (King)
Two conduct hearings (23H-052 & 24H-021) will be held on October 15, 2024 at 11:30 a.m.
Glenroy Kendal Bastien, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 16 & 17, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Ari Benjamin Kulidjian, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Two conduct hearings (23H-024 & 23H-050) will be held from October 16-18, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Charles Michael Cooke, Lawyer (Thornhill)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 16, 2024 at 1:30 p.m.
Giuseppe Jr. Campisi, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Peter Ian Murray, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings will be held on October 17 & 18, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Gregory Charles Hertzberger, Lawyer (Kitchener)
Mr. Hertzberger's licence is restricted on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
David Timothy Starr, Lawyer (Guelph)
Mr. Star engaged in professional misconduct by committing sexual harassment on his staff, improperly receiving cash, twice knowingly assisting and once encouraging dishonesty, fraud, crime, or illegal conduct, misapplying client trust funds, and using trust funds for purposes not related to the provision of legal services, His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $15,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Kaili Rachelle Horney, Paralegal (Windsor)
Ms. Horney's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Nahid Rahimi, Paralegal (Thornhill)
Ms. Rahimi engaged in professional misconduct by providing legal services through an improper business structure, twice failing to act with honour and integrity, twice breaching client confidentiality, misleading a client, practising outside the scope of her practice, failing to return a client's property, thrice failing to deposit funds, and failing to communicate at all relevant stages of a matter, Her licence is revoked, and she is ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Harold Joseph Murphy, Lawyer (Toronto)
In the context of a civil litigation matter, Mr. Murphy was alleged by the Law Society to have made unfounded and false allegations and threatened sanctions against other licensees, failed to be courteous, civil and act in good faith in his communications with other licensees, and failed to fulfill a previous undertaking to communicate in a civil and professional manner. The panel found that the allegations were proven. A penalty and costs hearing is to be scheduled.
Serdar Kalaycioglu, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Kalaycioglu applied for licensing while still on parole. He served 16.5 years in various prisons in the United States after being convicted of wire fraud. His conduct since that time had been exemplary. He demonstrated sincere remorse and that he had been rehabilitated. The Law Society opposed a finding of good character predominately because Mr. Kalaycioglu was still on parole. The panel rejected the Law Society’s argument that he could not be fully rehabilitated until he completed his parole and his sentence was ended. The panel concluded that he had earned a second chance and deserved the opportunity to serve the public as a lawyer. The panel found that he was of good character, and ordered that he comply with the special conditions of his parole, and disclose the Tribunal reasons and Parole Board decision to potential employers/clients.
Douglas Garfield Hugh Laframboise, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The Law Society is conducting nine investigations into Mr. Laframboise's conduct, including improper handling of client funds, failing to report criminal charges, practising while suspended, not complying with a practice review and not co-operating with a Law Society investigation. The panel concluded that there were reasonable grounds to believe that there was a significant risk of harm, both to members of the public and to the public interest in the administration of justice, if the respondent continued to practise law while these investigations continued. Mr. Laframboise was therefore suspended on an interlocutory basis.
- 04/10/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
There were no new notices posted this week.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Kaili Rachelle Horney, Paralegal (Windsor)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on October 7, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
David Timothy Starr, Lawyer (Guelph)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 8, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Shahryar Mazaheri, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on October 9, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Brian Allen Sherman, Lawyer (Aurora)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on October 9, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Ali Amiri, Paralegal (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on October 11, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Robert Anthony Watson, Lawyer (Burlington)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on October 11, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Jean Jacques Primeau, Lawyer (Verner)
Mr. Primeau engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated. The balance of the hearing is adjourned to a written hearing.
Victor Wall, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Wall engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by taking actions that he ought to have known would assist or facilitate dishonest, fraudulent, or illegal conduct, agreeing to use his trust account to move funds from one banking institution to another, using funds held in trust on behalf of a client to satisfy a financial obligation to another client, using his trust account for a purpose unrelated to the provision of legal services and engaging in conduct unbecoming in his role as an estate trustee. His licence is suspended for three months, he is ordered to participate in a spot audit, and he is ordered to pay $7,500 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Peter Robert Nicholas Harrison, Lawyer (Owen Sound)
The parties provided an agreed statement of facts and Mr. Harrison admitted that he transferred funds from his trust account to his general account before delivering an account and without carrying out the work requested. The panel found that the proposed penalty of revocation was appropriate, and so revoked Mr. Harrison's licence, and ordered him to reimburse $5,000 to a client and to pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
- 27/09/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
There were no new notices posted this week.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Timothy Kent Mobberley, Paralegal (London)
An appeal by the Law Society will be heard on October 2, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on October 4, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Mukesh Bhardwaj, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 4, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
There were no new orders posted this week.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Sean Leo Kevin Daley, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
The Law Society brought a motion for an order that findings from two decisions of the Ontario Securities Commission (OSC) be admissible as proof of facts in a conduct application, and to bar Mr. Daley from relitigating these findings. This arose from a situation where Mr. Daley had been found to have obstructed an OSC investigation relating to his digital currency company and an email he sent to his account holders telling them that they did not need to comply with an OSC summons. Based on the doctrine of abuse of process by relitigation, the panel ordered that the decisions were admissible, and that findings from the OSC merits decision be admissible as proof of facts and that Mr. Daley may not relitigate findings of fact from this hearing.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Ms. Singh's application for a licence was denied after a re-hearing following a successful appeal of the first denial. The panel received written submissions on costs. The Law Society argued that Ms. Singh had virtually no chance of success. The panel agreed that her chances were doubtful. Ms. Singh argued no costs were warranted due to the Law Society’s multiple unsuccessful adjournment requests and the procedural unfairness that necessitated a second hearing. The panel ordered Ms. Singh to pay costs of $10,000 over two years.
Winfield Edward Corcoran, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Corcoran acted as defence counsel in a sexual assault jury trial where the Crown successfully moved for a mistrial based on his ineffective counsel. The Crown later successfully moved for Mr. Corcoran to be removed as counsel for the accused. The panel found that Mr. Corcoran failed to meet the standard of practice of a defence counsel in a sexual assault jury trial by failing to know and adhere to the relevant sections of the Criminal Code, as well as demonstrating a lack of understanding of criminal procedure and the rules of evidence throughout the criminal trial. The panel further found that his repeated failure to avoid expressing personal opinions in front of the jury fell below the standard of a reasonably competent criminal defence lawyer. He failed to treat the court civilly, courteously or act in good faith when he proceeded in the trial without being able to hear properly due to a failure of his assistive devices, and he called a witness a liar. The panel decided that Mr. Corcoran's behaviour could cause the administration of justice to be called into question, and so requested that a penalty hearing be scheduled.
Deborah Ann Williams, Paralegal Applicant (Whitby)
Ms. Williams brought a motion seeking an order requiring the Law Society to pay for transcripts required for her appeal of the Hearing Division’s decision denying her application for a paralegal licence. The motion was dismissed and costs submissions were invited. The Law Society requested a reduced costs amount of $1,000. The panel found this to be fair and found that Ms. Williams did not demonstrate impecuniosity. Ms. Williams had in essence requested a reconsideration of the motion decision, and the panel found that there was no right of reconsideration of the merits of a such a Tribunal decision, and therefore dismissed the request.
Alec McLeod McLennan, Lawyer (Oakville)
While the Appeal Division dismissed Mr. McLennan's appeal, it did not find that he unduly prolonged the hearing. The appeal was not particularly complex and the Law Society’s bill of costs was reasonable. The panel acknowledged that due to Mr. McLennan’s age and the revocation of his licence, his employment prospects were limited. No evidence was provided as to his assets, and limited information was provided about his liabilities. Mr. McLennan was therefore ordered to pay $28,795 in costs.
- 20/09/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Archana Sharma, Lawyer (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 16, 2024.
Ngozi Akunna Oti, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 13, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Antonio Agozzino, Lawyer (King)
Two conduct hearings (24H-021 & 23H-052) will be held from September 23-27, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
James Garnet Battin, Lawyer (Tilsonburg)
A conduct hearing will be held from September 23-25, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Gregory Charles Hertzberger, Lawyer (Kitchener)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on September 24, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Victor Wall, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 27, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Sandra Emad Alsaffawi, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Alsaffawi engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations. She attended to receive advice from the Hearing Division.
Stephen Michael Labow, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Labow engaged in professional misconduct by breaching his obligation to encourage public respect for the administration of justice, failing to fulfill his undertaking to the Law Society, and failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. He has two months to satisfy all of his outstanding professional obligations, after which his licence will be suspended for four months. If he does not satisfy his professional obligations within the given timeframe, his licence will be revoked. He is also ordered to pay $27,927 in costs to the Law Society.
Thomas Albert Glock, Lawyer (Prescott)
Mr. Glock engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that. A $2,000 fine is ordered, along with another $2,000 fine if he has not co-operated by December 13, 2024. He is also ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Shahryar Mazaheri, Lawyer (Toronto)
The motion is adjourned to October 9, 2024, and Mr. Mazaheri's licence is suspended on an interim interlocutory basis.
Alec McLeod McLennan, Lawyer (Oakville)
The panel orders that Mr. McLennan will pay $28,795 in costs to the Law Society.
Christopher John Di Giacomo, Lawyer (Niagara Falls)
Mr. Di Giacomo engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended for two months, and he is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Bush engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended for three months, and he is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Sebastien Gauthier, parajuriste (Ottawa)
M. Gauthier s’est conduit d’une façon qui constitue un manquement professionnel en omettant de répondre sans délai et de manière complète à des communications du Barreau de l’Ontario ayant trait à une plainte. Le permis de l’intimé est révoqué immédiatement, et il est ordonné de verser des dépens du montant de 6 617,50 $.
Alka Singh, Paralegal (Toronto)
The panel orders that Ms. Singh will pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Deborah Ann Williams, Paralegal (Whitby)
Ms. Williams' request for reconsideration is dismissed. The panel orders that she will pay $1,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Antonio Caruso, Paralegal (Niagara Falls)
Mr. Caruso submitted that the complainant breached the Bencher Code of Conduct in making her complaint against him by using her position as a bencher to initiate the investigation and bring about the conduct application. The panel found there was no impropriety in the complainant’s behaviour in making the complaint or in following up after the complaint was made. Mr. Caruso also submitted that the investigation and conduct application should not have proceeded while his application for judicial review regarding the paralegal scope of practice was ongoing. The panel found that the timing of the investigation and application were matters of regulatory discretion.
The panel found no prejudicial delay in the commencement of the investigation, nor was there any requirement that Mr. Caruso receive prior notice before commencing the investigation. The panel found that there was no search or seizure under s. 8 of the Charter when copies of social media posts were made. The Proceedings Authorization Committee was not required to offer Mr. Caruso an opportunity to be heard, and their decisions were final and not subject to appeal or review.
The panel found that an implied undertaking applied in administrative proceedings as well as in courts that prevented the use of compelled disclosure outside of the proceeding prior to it becoming part of the public record of proceedings. Mr. Caruso did not show that the documents he sought were potentially relevant to matters at issue and so the motion for further disclosure was dismissed.
The issue of hearing fairness did not arise. The panel found that nothing alleged by Mr. Caruso would bring the administration of justice into disrepute, nor did Section 7 of the Charter apply. The motion to stay the proceedings as an abuse of process was therefore dismissed.
Christopher John Di Giacomo, Lawyer (Niagara Falls)
Mr. Di Giacomo's licence was revoked in March 2022. Following a successful appeal, it was reinstated in February 2023 and a 12-month suspension was ordered in place of the revocation. Prior to the reinstatement of his licence, Mr. Di Giacomo disposed of the hard copies of his books and records and therefore was unable to produce them when requested. The panel found that Mr. Di Giacomo did not promptly recreate the required documents books and records, including by not promptly requesting required copies from his bank, and therefore did not co-operate with the investigation. The panel ordered Mr. Di Giacomo suspended for two months, on a date to be agreed upon by the parties and also ordered him to pay $5,000 in costs.
- 13/09/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Kaili Rachelle Horney, Paralegal (Windsor)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 10, 2024.
Mark Elkin, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 9, 2024.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Brampton)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on September 5, 2024.
James Ivan Marini, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 4, 2024.
Leona Editha Collantes Eilinger, Paralegal (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 3, 2024.
Jesse Lee James Valkenier, Paralegal (Brockville)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 3, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Sebastien Gauthier, parajuriste (Ottawa)
Une audience de conduite est prévue pour le 16 septembre 2024 à 9 h.
Shahryar Mazaheri, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on September 16, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Antonio Caruso, Paralegal (Niagara Falls)
A conduct hearing will be held from September 17 - 20, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on September 17, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Waqas Amjad, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Mr. Amjad's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
Mr. Guiste's motion for a stay is granted.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
James Robert Arnold, Lawyer (Waterloo)
The Law Society brought a motion for an interlocutory suspension because Mr. Arnold informed them that he had misappropriated significant funds from his trust account. The money was meant to cover employee salaries and was returned to the account shortly afterwards. The panel found that the test for an interlocutory suspension was met, as there were reasonable grounds for believing that there was a significant risk of harm to members of the public. Further, it found that misappropriating trust funds was an allegation that bore directly on Mr. Arnold's integrity and trustworthiness, and that there was a reasonable prospect of revocation. The panel therefore ordered an interlocutory suspension of Mr. Arnold's licence to practise law.
Maria Mikhailitchenko, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Mikhailitchenko's request for an adjournment was denied. The panel found that there was no compelling evidence to support that Ms. Mikhailitchenko was incapable of responding to the serious case presented by the Law Society. Ms. Mikhailitchenko failed to respond to five complaints related to misappropriating, mishandling, or misapplying trust funds. She admitted that the Law Society’s evidence was compelling and the panel found there was a significant risk of harm to members of the public or to the public interest in the administration of justice such that an order was required, and so her licence was suspended on an interlocutory basis.
Jeremy Nathaniel Mandell, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Mandell was alleged to have failed to comply with an undertaking in relation to a real estate transaction, failed to comply with a court order to comply with the undertaking, and failed to account for over $142,000 in relation to the transaction. He acknowledged his conduct and consented to the Law Society’s request for an interim suspension. The panel found that there was credible and cogent evidence of a significant risk of harm to members of the public and the public interest in the administration of justice, and ordered Mr. Mandell's licence to be suspended on an interlocutory basis.
Michael Peter Joseph Panacci, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel found that Mr. Panacci had notice of the hearing and had informed the Law Society that he would not be attending. The hearing proceeded in his absence. Bank statements showed that Mr. Panacci began transferring the mortgage proceeds from his trust account to his general account. The evidence showed trust monies remained unpaid to the client over a year later. The panel found that there were reasonable grounds to believe that there was a significant risk of harm to the public or the public interest in the administration of justice, due to grave concerns about Mr. Panacci's integrity. He was suspended on an interlocutory basis.
Gary John McCallum, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel held that it was not obliged to follow the test set out in Bradley v. Ontario College of Teachers for joint submissions because this was a contested hearing. The panel concluded that the proposed joint submission was in accordance with the panel’s assessment of the factors set out in Aguirre. Mr. McCallum was reprimanded and ordered to pay $15,000 in costs. He was also ordered to complete certain continuing professional development requirements.
- 06/09/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
No new notices were posted this week.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Harvinder Singh Saran, Lawyer Applicant (Brampton)
A licensing hearing will be held on September 10 & 11, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on September 11, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Antonio Caruso, Paralegal (Niagara Falls)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 13, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Frederick Allen Yack, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Yack's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Lior Samfiru, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Samfiru responded to negative Google reviews by threatening or commencing litigation. The panel found that his actions were aggressive and lacked integrity. He also threatened to report a former client’s character to the Law Society to prevent her from becoming a paralegal. Mr. Samfiru conceded that he had engaged in professional misconduct and the panel accepted the joint submission of a reprimand and costs of $5,000 payable to the Law Society.
Robin Anne MacLeod, Paralegal (Innisfil)
The uncontested evidence established that Ms. MacLeod failed to promptly and completely provide information required for multiple investigations on many occasions over several months. Given the overlap between the prior discipline and these complaints, the panel ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance followed by a one-month suspension. Ms. MacLeod was also ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Jeremy Merrick Magence, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel found that Mr. Magence entered into a contract with a paralegal firm and failed to prevent the unauthorized provision of legal services by the paralegals. Their referral fee agreement was not in writing, and Mr. Magence was misleadingly listed on the paralegal firm website even though he was not a member of the firm. The panel further found that Mr. Magence inappropriately contacted and took on clients represented by another lawyer working with the paralegal firm, and failed to report referral fees or keep required books and records of these fees. The panel accepted as reasonable the joint submission on penalty and costs of a two-month suspension and $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Joseph Francesco Lo Greco, Lawyer (Aurora)
The panel had previously found that Mr. Lo Greco failed to act with integrity in relation to his declaration regarding a Procura Generale, an Italian power of attorney document, and had ordered a reprimand. The panel ordered costs of $10,000 based on a consideration of other cases and factors, including the length of the hearing of two days and the fact that there was a partial agreed statement of facts.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Barnwell appealed from the findings of professional misconduct and numerous interlocutory orders made by the Hearing Division. In the alternative, he sought a reduced penalty from permission to surrender his licence. The appeal panel determined that the hearing panel correctly considered whether racial discrimination was a factor in the investigation and the decision to commence proceedings, and that the hearing panel also correctly applied the Tribunal’s jurisprudence regarding the mental element required for knowing assistance in fraud.
Given the serious nature of the misconduct, the appeal panel found that the hearing panel did not err in concluding that the presumptive penalty of revocation applied. The remaining grounds of appeal were found to be meritless, and the appeal was dismissed. Costs of the hearing and appeal remain to be dealt with.
- 30/08/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Waqas Amjad, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on August 26, 2024.
Tracey Marie Resetar (Foster), Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of appeal by the licence applicant was filed on August 26, 2024.
Kareem Olando Vinton, Lawyer (Pickering)
A notice of cross-appeal by the licensee was filed on August 21, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Shahryar Mazaheri & Frederick Allen Yack, Lawyers (Toronto)
Two motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearings will be heard on September 4 & 5, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Stephen Michael Labow, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 6, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
A motion within an appeal by the licensee will be heard on September 6, 2024 at 1:30 p.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Barnwell's appeal is dismissed.
Ronald Ori Davidovic, Lawyer (Miami, FL)
Mr. Davidovic engaged in conduct unbecoming by committing the felony of conspiracy to commit health care fraud and wire fraud. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $1,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Ms. Deokaran engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a licensee in numerous instances, including by failing to respond to opposing counsel and Legal Aid Ontario, misleading opposing counsel and the court, misleading and failing to serve her clients, fabricating documents, instructing her law partner to send misleading communications to opposing counsel, falsely accusing her law partner of assault, falsifying her law partner’s signature on Teranet forms, breaching her duty of loyalty to her former client and failing to maintain her client’s confidential information, communicating directly with a represented person after being advised not to do so, practising law while under suspension, threatening to report an immigrant client to prevent him from returning to Canada and making false accusations about another lawyer to the court. Her licence is revoked, and she is ordered to pay $120,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Joseph Francesco Lo Greco, Lawyer (Aurora)
The panel orders that Mr. Lo Greco will pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Carolyn Maureen Gerbac, Lawyer (Carleton Place)
Ms. Gerback engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. Her licence is suspended until she has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and she is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine and a further $2,000 fine if she hasn't co-operated by September 28, 2024. She is also ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Melanie Gloria Christine Zopf, Paralegal (Scarborough)
Ms. Zopf engaged in professional misconduct by applying for a job at a law firm without admitting that she was a paralegal and was suspended, and by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. Her licence is revoked, and she is ordered to pay $5,500 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Dennis Kashmeel Keevantoza McKöena, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. McKöena, a retired military officer, contacted the military police on behalf of a client. During the call, which was recorded, he identified himself as a Major four times and as a JAG officer twice. The military police commenced an investigation which led to Mr. McKöena being charged for falsely representing himself as a public officer. The charge was stayed about six months later. The panel found that Mr. McKöena misrepresented himself as a serving member of the Canadian Armed Forces and engaged in professional misconduct by not reporting the criminal charge, as well as misleading the Law Society during the investigation.
Mr. McKöena denied intentionally misrepresenting himself and misleading the Law Society, and argued his conduct was the result of his post-traumatic stress disorder with dissociative features. Mr. McKöena sought to rely on two expert medical reports in support of this defence. The first report was served on the Law Society well outside the time required by the Rules. The second report was served even later: after the Law Society had closed its case and Mr. McKöena had been cross-examined. The panel concluded that the prejudice to Mr. McKöena in excluding the initial report outweighed the prejudice to the Law Society of allowing its late receipt. However the same was not the case for the second report filed mid-hearing, and so it was not admitted. The panel found that Mr. McKöena failed to establish that his mental health conditions were a credible defence to the allegations; a hearing on penalty is to be scheduled.
Mark Andrew Mendl, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society brought a motion for an interlocutory suspension of Mr. Mendl's licence to practise. The panel found that the test for an interlocutory suspension was met, as there was a risk of harm to the public because Mr. Mendl failed to provide his file, to account for $2.8 million transferred to his trust account, and to co-operate with the Law Society’s investigation, as well as the fact that he had been found to be in contempt of court. Mr. Mendl consented to an interlocutory suspension because of issues of integrity. The panel ordered his licence to be suspended on an interlocutory basis.
Kareem Olando Vinton, Lawyer (Pickering)
Following review of multiple litigation matters in which Mr. Vinton's competency and judgment were challenged, the panel concluded that there were reasonable grounds for believing that there was a significant risk of harm to members of the public, or the public interest in the administration of justice, if an interlocutory order was not made. The panel held that restrictions on Mr. Vinton's practice would sufficiently protect the public. The panel ordered Mr. Vinton to co-operate with a practice review and comply with and implement any recommendations made. Mr. Vinton was also ordered to maintain, and update as needed, a memo for each file to be provided to the Law Society on a monthly basis.
Mukesh Bhardwaj, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
Mr. Bhardwaj admitted to recording a multi-day criminal trial without the knowledge or permission of the hearing judge. The panel did not accept Mr. Bhardwaj's submission that registering notice of an amendment to an existing residential mortgage did not trigger the conflict of interest provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Another allegation of acting in a conflict of interest in a loan transaction was dismissed as the borrowers were represented by another lawyer. A hearing on penalty will be scheduled.
- 23-08-2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Kareem Olando Vinton, Lawyer (Pickering)
A notice of appeal by the Law Society was filed on August 21, 2024.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on August 16, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Antonio Caruso, Paralegal (Niagara Falls)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on August 26, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Melanie Gloria Christine Zopf, Paralegal (Scarborough)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 27, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Shahryar Mazaheri & Frederick Allen Yack, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearings will be heard on August 27, 2024 at 1:30 p.m.
Ronald Ori Davidovic, Lawyer (Sunrise, FL)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 28, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 29, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Coe Hill)
Mr. McMackin engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a licensee by misappropriating trust funds, failing to abide by a court order, failing to maintain books and records and failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is revoked, he is ordered to reimburse $51,987.27, and he is ordered to pay $6,055 in costs to the Law Society.
Shahryar Mazaheri & Frederick Allen Yack, Lawyer (Toronto)
The interlocutory hearing is adjourned. Ms. Mazaheri and Mr. Yack may not authorize disbursements to be made from any trust account, and must provide the Law Society with information regarding trust accounts of over which they are a signing authority.
Any Mayer, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Ms. Mayer engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. Her licence is suspended until she has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and she is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Douglas Garfield Hugh Laframboise, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Laframboise's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Jane Louise Poproski, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Ms. Poproski admitted to engaging in professional misconduct in three of the four particulars set out in the notice. The Law Society argued that contesting the fourth particular should be seen as an aggravating factor. The panel stated that it was within Ms. Poproski's rights to proceed to a hearing where a joint resolution could not be found. After reviewing the Aguirre factors the panel did not agree with the Law Society’s request for a six-month suspension, or Ms. Poproski's submission of a one-month suspension. She was therefore suspended for three months and ordered to pay $10,000 in costs.
Alisa Mazo, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Mazo moved to stay the conduct proceeding against her on the basis of an abuse of process; she alleged that the investigator misled her banks into releasing confidential information without legal authority, disclosed confidential information to the banks and improperly relied on PIPEDA to obtain information. Ms. Mazo also alleged that the investigator had an animus towards her amounting to bad faith. The panel found that, with one exception, the investigatory steps taken were appropriate and within the broad authorization of the Law Society Act; while the investigator should not have relied on PIPEDA, doing so did not amount to such exceptional conduct to demonstrate bad faith or an abuse of process. Ms. Mazo's motion to stay the proceeding was dismissed.
Nathan William Currie, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Following the unsuccessful application for a paralegal licence, the panel sought submissions on costs. Mr. Currie did not provide submissions. The panel did not accept the Law Society’s submission that the applicant had virtually no chance of success. Mr. Currie did not dispute the facts but instead how those facts should be characterized. The hearing took one day and was not complex and Mr. Currie fully co-operated. He was therefore ordered to pay $2,700 in costs to the Law Society over three years.
Stephen Michael Labow, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel found that Mr. Labow's evidence was not credible. The panel did not accept his evidence that he did not comply with court orders because he was unaware of them. The panel also did not accept that he relied on his counsel to co-operate with the Law Society and was unaware that she did not do so. The panel found Mr. Labow's submissions did not accord with common sense or the circumstances that existed at the time. He did not provide sufficient evidence to show that he was financially unable to satisfy the court orders. The panel found that the Law Society proved the allegations and a hearing on penalty and costs is scheduled.
Timothy Michael Kinnaird, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Kinnaird was found to have engaged in professional misconduct by knowingly participating in two fraudulent mortgage transactions, by misleading the Law Society regarding his practice, by failing to co-operate with the Law Society’s investigation and by practising while suspended. The panel directed the Tribunal to arrange a penalty and costs hearing.
- 16/08/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Shahryar Mazaheri, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on August 13, 2024.
Frederick Allen Yack, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on August 13, 2024.
Gregory Charles Hertzberger, Lawyer (Kitchener)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on August 9, 2024.
Shiny Pappachan, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on August 9, 2024.
Wayne Andrew Chorney, Lawyer (Sault Ste. Marie)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 9, 2024.
Jean Jacques Primeau, Lawyer (Verner)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 9, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Coe Hill)
A conduct hearing will be held from August 19-23, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Mark Andrew Mendl, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Mendl's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Jeremy Nathaniel Mandell, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Mandell's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Jane Louise Poproski, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Ms. Poproski engaged in professional misconduct by failing to fulfill financial obligations to service providers, improperly dealing with funds received from opposing parties in trust, automatically recording phone calls without informing the other person, and failing to act with integrity. Her licence is suspended for three months, and she is ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Kaili Rachelle Horney, Paralegal (Windsor)
Ms. Horney's request for an adjournment is granted. Her licence is suspended on an interim interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Robin Anne MacLeod, Paralegal (Innisfil)
Ms. MacLeod engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with seven Law Society investigations. Her licence is suspended until she has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and she is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Nathan William Currie, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Currie will pay $2,700 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Antonio Caruso, Paralegal (Niagara Falls)
The Law Society brought a motion to quash 16 summonses and to find three affidavits inadmissible. The panel reviewed the test from Airport Taxicab as affirmed and applied by the Tribunal in several cases, as well as the application of privilege. The panel decided to allow the Law Society’s motion in part; two of the affidavits were found to have some relevance and thirteen summonses were quashed. The panel set out specific items that the remaining individuals summonsed did not have to provide. Costs were reserved to be determined after Mr. Caruso's motion to dismiss was determined.
- 09/08/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Harneet Kaur, Paralegal / Lawyer Applicant (Mississauga)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on August 2, 2024.
Danielle Shannon Harrison, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 2, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Douglas Garfield Hugh Laframboise, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on August 12 & 13, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Olena Manoilo, Paralegal Applicant (Jasper, AB)
A licensing hearing will be held on August 13 & 14, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Charles Michael Cooke, Lawyer (Thornhill)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 14, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Abba Emmanuel Chima, Lawyer (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 15 & 16, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Antonio Caruso, Paralegal (Niagara Falls)
A motion hearing within a conduct proceeding will be held on August 15 & 16, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Peter Robert Nicholas Harrison, Lawyer (Owen Sound)
Mr. Harrison engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating $9,000 in trust funds. His licence is revoked immediately. He is ordered to reimburse Client A $5,000 and pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Chukwuma Chuks Oriuwa, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Oriuwa engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with four Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that. He is also ordered to pay a fine of $2,500 and $1,500 in costs to the Law Society. If Mr. Oriuwa hasn't co-operated by September 2, 2024, he shall pay an additional fine of $2,500.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Francesco Salvatore Bernard Alfano, Paralegal (Hamilton)
The panel accepted evidence from the Law Society following the hearing of the motion for an interlocutory suspension and received Mr. Alfano’s reply submissions. The panel found that on the totality of the evidence there were reasonable grounds to believing that he posed a significant risk of harm to the public and to the public interest in the administration of justice and that practise restrictions were not sufficient to address the risk. Mr. Alfano was suspended on an interlocutory basis.
Myles Frederick McLellan, Lawyer Applicant (Barrie)
The Appeal Division allowed Mr. McLellan’s appeal of a decision dismissing his licensing application. Mr. McLellan requested that the Hearing Division costs award be set aside and also requested costs of the appeal. The panel set aside the hearing panel’s costs decision. It found that Mr. McLellan did not establish that the proceeding was unwarranted or that the Law Society caused costs to be incurred without reasonable cause or to be wasted by undue delay, negligence or other default. Mr. McLellan’s request for costs was dismissed.
- 02/08/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Tomas Albert Glock, Lawyer (Prescott)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 25, 2024.
Robert Anthony Watson, Lawyer (Burlington)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 25, 2024.
Francesco Salvatore Bernard Alfano, Paralegal (Hamilton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 25, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Harold Joseph Murphy, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 6 and 8, 2024 (at 10:00 a.m.)
Peter Robert Nicholas Harrison, Lawyer (Owen Sound)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 6, 2024 (at 10:00 a.m.)
Jeremy Nathaniel Mandell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on August 8, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Francesco Salvatore Bernard Alfano, Paralegal (Hamilton)
Mr. Alfano's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the application to which the motion relates.
Myles Frederick McLellan, Lawyer Applicant (Barrie)
Further to the panel's June 6, 2024 order granting his appeal, the panel ordered that the Hearing Division costs order is set aside and that no costs are awarded on the appeal.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Deborah Ann Williams, Paralegal Applicant (Whitby)
Ms. Williams brought a motion seeking an order requiring the Law Society to pay for transcripts required for her appeal of the Hearing Division’s decision denying her application for a paralegal licence. The panel found that Ms. Williams had not met either part of the test: an appeal with a reasonable prospect of success or sufficient proof of an inability to pay for the transcripts. The motion was dismissed and costs submissions were invited.
Ruth-Anne Dawn Avruskin, Lawyer (Orangeville)
The panel had found that Ms. Avruskin had engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation and practising while suspended. She had previously been found to have failed to co-operate. Ms. Avruskin did not provide any evidence or submissions on the issues of penalty and costs. There was insufficient evidence regarding health as a mitigating factor. Based on principles of progressive discipline, the panel ordered an indefinite suspension until compliance as well as a four-month suspension to follow. The panel also ordered costs of $4,000 to the Law Society.
Donald Peter Boychyn, Lawyer (Oshawa)
The Law Society brought a motion for an interlocutory suspension because its investigation provided evidence that Mr. Boychyn had misappropriated significant funds from client trust accounts. Mr. Boychyn did not dispute the misconduct. The panel found that the test for an interlocutory suspension was met, as there were reasonable grounds for believing that there is a significant risk of harm to members of the public. Further, it found that misappropriating trust funds is an allegation that bears directly on Mr. Boychyn’s integrity and trustworthiness and that there is a reasonable prospect of revocation. Mr. Boychyn also consented to the interlocutory suspension. The panel ordered an interlocutory suspension of Mr. Boychyn’s licence to practise law.
Michael Israel Rappaport, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Rappaport appealed from the Hearing Division’s finding that he engaged in professional misconduct and penalty decision that suspended him for five months and ordered him to pay $55,000 in costs. The appeal panel found that the hearing panel did not err when it concluded that Mr. Rappaport failed to encourage respect for the administration of justice. There was no basis for a mistrial and the notice of application was sufficiently specific so that Mr. Rappaport was aware of the Law Society’s allegations against him. The hearing panel did not need to receive expert evidence where the failings alleged were very basic in nature. The appeal panel concluded that the penalty was not clearly unfit or tainted by error and the costs awarded were appropriate. Mr. Rappaport’s appeal was dismissed.
Elnaz Mazinani, Lawyer (North York)
The Law Society brought a motion to preclude Ms. Mazinani from re-litigating findings of fact from a civil proceeding in the defence of a conduct proceeding against her. The court made credibility findings regarding a purported new offer to settle and altered documents provided by Ms. Mazinani. The panel found that it would be unfair to preclude Ms. Mazinani from re-litigating the findings of fact because she was not a party to nor had she appeared as counsel or as a witness in the proceedings. The decisions were ordered to be admitted into evidence but the Law Society’s motion was dismissed. Costs to be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the application.
- 26/07/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Carolyn Maureen Gerbac, Lawyer (Carleton Place)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 23, 2024.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
A notice of application regarding capacity was filed on July 24, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Nahid Rahimi, Paralegal (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 29 (at 9:00 a.m.) and 30, 2024 (at 10:00 a.m.)
Giuseppe Jr. Campisi, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 29 to August 1, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Peter Ian Murray, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 29 to August 1, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Mark Andrew Mendl, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on July 31, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Kaili Rachelle Horney, Paralegal (Windsor)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on August 1, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Robin Anne MacLeod, Paralegal (Innisfil)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on August 2, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Michael Peter Joseph Panacci, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Panacci's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the application to which the motion relates.
Serdar Kalaycioglu, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Dr. Kalaycioglu is presently of good character and must comply with the special conditions of his Parole Board of Canada Decision until such time as the parole period expires.
Bruce Gordon Joseph Moquin, Paralegal (Casselman)
Mr. Moquin engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that. He is also ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Daniel Bruno Bérubé, Paralegal (Haileybury)
Mr. Bérubé engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that. He is also ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Sheriza Mohammed-Ali, Lawyer (Etobicoke)
Further to the panel's May 22, 2024 order revoking her licence, the panel ordered Ms. Mohammed-Ali to pay $30,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Kareem Olando Vinton, Lawyer (Pickering)
Mr. Vinton's was ordered to consent to and co-operate with a practice review. Certain terms were imposed on him, failing to comply with which will result in his licence being suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the ultimate application, if any.
Ali Amiri, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Amiri's licence is suspended on an interim interlocutory basis. The interlocutory suspension motion is adjourned to October 11, 2024. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the application to which the motion relates.
Michael Israel Rappaport, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Rappaport's appeal of the Hearing Division decision finding that he engaged in professional misconduct and suspending his licence for five months is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
Having earlier found that Mr. Guiste engaged in professional misconduct, the panel considered the issues of penalty and costs for the 27-day hearing. Mr. Guiste submitted two professional reports but the panel did not fully accept the conclusions in the reports as they either did not have complete information or ignored the panel’s findings. The panel accepted that Mr. Guiste’s conduct during the hearing could not be used to increase the penalty for the found misconduct but could be considered in assessing the credibility of other potentially mitigating factors. The panel did not find that Mr. Guiste was remorseful or that he accepted responsibility for his misconduct. Although Mr. Guiste’s conduct at the hearing suggested he had not changed his ways, the panel accepted that he is older and wiser and does not want to engage in further misconduct.
The panel concluded that the misconduct as found was serious. The prior finding of incivility had an aggravating effect on penalty. Mr. Guiste did not demonstrate remorse or acceptance of responsibility. Mr. Guiste’s experience of anti-Black racism was considered in mitigating penalty as was the fact that he serves an underserviced clientele often for little pay. The panel noted that Mr. Guiste’s conduct lengthened the hearing and accepted that he had some financial limitations. Mr. Guiste was suspended for three months and ordered to pay $225,000 in costs over five years.
John William McDonald, Lawyer (Cambridge)
The Law Society alleged that Mr. McDonald failed to co-operate in two investigations. The panel found that he engaged in professional misconduct, as he did not provide prompt and complete answers to these enquiries, despite extensive communications between him and the Law Society. Mr. McDonald did eventually comply with the Law Society’s requests before the hearing, and the panel accepted the Law Society’s request for a reprimand. The panel ordered costs of $20,000 to the Law Society.
Sheriza Mohammed-Ali, Lawyer (Etobicoke)
Ms. Mohammed-Ali, although properly served, did not respond to the request to admit or attend the hearing, which proceeded in her absence. The panel found that she created and provided false documents, misappropriated significant client trust funds and failed to maintain books and records. There was no evidence of mitigating or exceptional circumstances to warrant a departure from the presumptive penalty of revocation of licence in cases of misappropriation. Ms. Mohammed-Ali’s licence to practise was revoked, and costs of $30,000 to the Law Society were ordered.
- 19/07/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Tina Shah Butler, Paralegal Applicant (Etobicoke)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on July 11, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
John Paul McLaughlin, Lawyer (Oakville)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on July 23, 2024 at 9:00 a.m.
Cosimo Vecchiarelli, Lawyer (Vaughan)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 23, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Ali Amiri, Paralegal (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on July 24, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Antonio Caruso, Paralegal (Niagara Falls)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on July 25, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Timothy James Hilborn, Lawyer (Cambridge)
Mr. Hilborn engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by failing to maintain proper books and records, failing to maintain sufficient trust balances, pre-taking, and conflating his duties as executor and as solicitor. His licence is suspended for 30 days, and he is ordered to pay $2,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Alisa Mazo, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel orders that Ms. Mazo will pay $20,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Tracey Marie Resetar (Foster), Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Ms. Foster's application for reinstatement is dismissed.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
Mr. Guiste engaged in professional misconduct by failing to treat the court with courtesy and respect, twice failing to be courteous and civil with opposing counsel, failing to represent his client to the standard of a competent lawyer, failing to act with integrity and failing to encourage public confidence in and respect for the administration of justice. His licence is suspended for three months, and he is ordered to pay $225,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Sharie-Ann Campbell, Lawyer (Bowmanville)
Ms. Campbell engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. Her licence is suspended until she has fully co-operated, and a reprimand is ordered, along with $2,500 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Alisa Mazo, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel decided that costs incurred by the Executive Director of Professional Regulation in giving evidence should not be included in calculating the Law Society’s costs; while his evidence was helpful, he was not an independent expert. The panel also found that Ms. Mazo's motions were unsuccessful and the Law Society had to expend substantial time and effort in responding, and so ordered her to pay $20,000 in costs to the Law Society immediately.
Tracey Marie Resetar (Foster), Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Ms. Foster's licence had been suspended since a capacity application was determined in 2007. The panel found that Ms. Foster had not established a breach of her s. 7 or 15 Charter rights. The panel held that her dignity interests were engaged, as much of the information on the record went to the core of who she is. The panel concluded that a publication ban on the record preserved her dignity interests with the least encroachment on the open court principle because the reasons provided sufficient detail of the facts taken into account in reaching the decision. The panel was not persuaded by Ms. Foster's medical expert for various reasons, including that he did not have recent clinical experience with adults, was unaware of the statutory regime governing the regulation of lawyers in Ontario, did not retain his notes of the meetings with Ms. Foster, only spoke with her, and made no mention of the medical report that led to the 2007 capacity order. Ms. Foster did not consent to be examined by the Law Society’s expert, who conducted a review of the medical record and collateral information. The Law Society’s expert concluded there was no psychiatric evidence that Ms. Foster was no longer suffering from the significant psychiatric disorder that led to her suspension in 2007. The application for reinstatement was therefore dismissed.
Harkunwar Singh Klair, Lawyer (Markham)
The Law Society brought a motion for an interlocutory suspension. The panel had previously ordered an interim interlocutory suspension. Mr. Klair consented to the draft order that his licence be suspended on an interlocutory basis. Even though he had returned the money, the panel found that there were reasonable grounds to believe there was a significant risk of harm to the public or the public interest in the administration of justice, as there was evidence of misappropriation of $105,473.32 and a failure to co-operate with the Law Society’s investigation. The panel ordered an interlocutory suspension. Costs of this motion were reserved to the panel presiding at any application to which the motion relates.
- 12/07/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Marilyn Jenny Monteiro, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 10, 2024.
Mark Andrew Mendl, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on July 8, 2024.
David Cameron Moore, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 5, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Serdar Kalaycioglu, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held on July 16 & 17, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Gregory Charles Hertzberger, Lawyer (Kitchener)
Mr. Hertzberger engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain books and records and failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations. A reprimand is ordered, and an indefinite suspension, pending books and records compliance, plus one month, if he does not bring his books and records into compliance by June 10, 2024. He is also ordered to pay $8,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Ruth-Anne Avruskin, Lawyer (Orangeville)
Ms. Avruskin engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond to Law Society requests, breaching an undertaking and holding herself out to practice law while she was suspended. Her licence is suspended until she has fully co-operated, and for four months after that, and she is ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Donald Peter Boychyn, Lawyer (Oshawa)
Mr. Boychyn's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Sharie-Ann Campbell, Lawyer (Bowmanville)
Investigative requests were made in July 2023. Most were outstanding until late May 2024 and several were not completed by the time of the hearing. Ms. Campbell did not respond promptly because she had not maintained her books and records as required. The panel found that Ms. Campbell experienced serious difficulties that affected her response, but that these did not amount to a defense, but rather should be considered in mitigation with respect to penalty. A penalty hearing is to be scheduled.
Antonio Caruso, Paralegal (Niagara Falls)
Mr. Caruso brought a motion to stay the conduct proceeding pending disposition of his court application under s. 137.1 of the Courts of Justice Act. The panel dismissed the motion because s. 137.4 does not apply where there is no court proceeding by the party who has brought the tribunal proceeding. The Charter aspect of the motion was adjourned, to be heard together with Mr. Caruso's other motion seeking a dismissal of the conduct application as an abuse of process. Mr. Caruso was also ordered to pay $1,000 in costs to the Law Society.
- 05/07/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Robert MacRae, Lawyer (Sault Ste. Marie)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on July 3, 2024.
Sandra Emad Alsaffawi, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 28, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Ranjit Singh Gill, Paralegal (Cambridge)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 9, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Donald Peter Boychyn, Lawyer (Oshawa)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on July 9, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Stephen Michael Labow, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 10, 11 & 12, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Dennis Kashmeel Keevantoza McKoena, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 10, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Tarnjit Singh Aujla, Lawyer Applicant (Brampton)
A licensing hearing will be held on July 11 & 12, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Antonio Caruso, Paralegal (Niagara Falls)
Mr. Caruso's motion for a stay is dismissed. He is ordered to pay $1,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Ms. Singh had disclosed suspensions and other measures imposed by other regulators related to brokerage firms and securities trading; however, she failed to disclose ongoing private criminal matters in India. The panel noted that she had been found guilty of unethical conduct by three separate regulatory authorities and exhibited a similar lack of candour in failing to disclose information out of evasive self-interest. The panel found that she did not accept responsibility and had no genuine remorse, and so dismissed her application for licensing as a paralegal.
Silky Attri, Paralegal (Etobicoke)
Ms. Attri brought a motion to dismiss the conduct application brought by the LSO. The conduct application arose in the context of concerns surrounding the 2021 lawyer licensing examinations. Ms. Attri applied for licensing as a lawyer and a good character investigation was commenced. A conduct investigation was also commenced with respect to her conduct in relation to the lawyer licensing examinations.
The panel concluded that the Divisional Court decision in Mirza did not affect the conduct application. Neither did double jeopardy apply as this was not a case of multiple conduct proceedings about the same alleged misconduct, there being a fundamental difference between a conduct proceeding and a licensing proceeding. Because of the public interest in timely accountability, the panel decided that the conduct proceeding should not be stayed to await a decision in the good character investigation. The motion to dismiss the conduct application was therefore dismissed.
Joseph Francesco Lo Greco, Lawyer (Aurora)
The Law Society alleged that Mr. Lo Greco failed to act with integrity in relation to his declaration regarding to a Procura Generale, an Italian power of attorney document. Mr. Lo Greco brought a motion to convert the application into an Invitation to Attend (ITA). The panel found that professional misconduct was established, as Mr. Lo Greco made declarations that were untrue. It determined that the application should not be converted to an ITA because the misconduct, while not at the fraudulent end of the spectrum, was significant, as it involved a false representation in a document. In consideration of factors such as Mr. Lo Greco's long history of practice with no discipline history, that the misconduct was a one-time event and not motivated by self-interest, Mr. Lo Greco's agreement to many of the facts, and extenuating circumstances such as the Covid-19 pandemic, the panel ordered a reprimand. Written submissions on costs were invited.
Sarah Zakir, Lawyer (Markham)
Ms. Zakir entered into a contract with a paralegal firm and failed to prevent the unauthorized provision of legal services by the paralegals. The clients were not notified about how the fee-splitting arrangement operated and the clients did not consent to the specific arrangement. The fees were split according to flat rates and not in proportion to the work done. Ms. Zakir's firm used “associates” in its name despite never employing other lawyers. The panel accepted the joint submission on penalty of a reprimand, as it was not unreasonable or unconscionable.
Gregory Charles Hertzberger, Lawyer (Kitchen)
Mr. Hertzberger did not dispute the allegations and the parties made a joint submission on penalty and costs. He had made efforts to recreate his books and records and a cyberattack was a contributing factor in his misconduct. He had made a complete response to the first Law Society investigation but took over a year to do so. The panel found that professional misconduct was established. The panel accepted the joint submission for a penalty of a reprimand and an indefinite suspension if books and records were not brought into compliance by June 10, 2024, and ordered costs of $8,000 to the Law Society.
Robin Morch, Lawyer (Longeuil, QC)
Mr. Morch was alleged to have misrepresented filings and dockets in proceedings and to have been overpaid more than $80,000 by Legal Aid Ontario. The Law Society began an investigation but Mr. Morch did not promptly respond, citing health concerns and an inability to locate records because of an interprovincial move, as well as disputing the legitimacy of the investigation. Mr. Morch did not provide access to requested medical records or request accommodation aside from multiple requests for extensions of time to respond to the Law Society. He claimed that he had provided as much information as he was able and carried on a limited immigration practice online. The panel found that Mr. Morch had not provided complete responses to the Law Society investigation and had not provided sufficient medical evidence to establish that his medical concerns prevented him from promptly and completely responding. The panel found that Mr. Morch was required to reply promptly and completely to the Law Society requests and that he had failed to do so. It found that professional misconduct had been established. It ordered a penalty of an indefinite suspension linked to compliance, followed by a one-month suspension and costs of $5,000 to the Law Society.
Richard Adedayo Odeleye, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
Mr. Odeleye argued that the Law Society investigator abused her powers, acted in bad faith and denied him procedural fairness. The panel found that Mr. Odeleye had clear notice of the case against him and the opportunity to take whatever steps he believed necessary to prepare. The panel found that Mr. Odeleye did not establish an abuse of process, and a stay was not justified in the circumstances. The motion was dismissed, with costs to be determined by the panel hearing the merits.
Vishal Pravinkumar Chotai, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The panel concluded that Mr. Chotai was not aware of the source of the funds used to purchase the second bank draft in the property transaction. As a result, the panel found Mr. Chotai did not mislead or attempt to mislead another lawyer or the Law Society investigator. The application was therefore dismissed.
- 28/06/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Jane Louise Poproski, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 26, 2024.
Kaili Rachelle Horney, Paralegal (Windsor)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on June 25, 2024.
Mikesh Harish Patel, Lawyer (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 21, 2024.
Donald Peter Boychyn, Lawyer (Oshawa)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on June 21, 2024.
Jeremy Nathaniel Mandell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on June 20, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Sang-Kyun Suh, Lawyer (Toronto)
An appeal by the Law Society will be heard on July 5, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Michael Peter Joseph Panacci, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on July 5, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Francesco Lo Greco, Lawyer (Aurora)
Mr. Lo Greco engaged in professional misconduct by notarizing a Procura Generale in which he made several untrue statements. A reprimand is ordered.
Jeremy Merrick Magence, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Magence engaged in professional misconduct by engaging in untrue or inaccurate advertising, failing to record referral fees properly, failing to prevent the unauthorized provision of legal services, failing to confirm in writing the terms of a referral fee agreement, engaging in direct communications with represented parties, failing to ensure that a former lawyer had approved, withdrawn or discharged themselves before acting for clients and failing to act with integrity. His licence is suspended for two months, and he is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Trevor Louis Kozma, Paralegal (Strathroy)
Mr. Kozma engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Crystale Dawn Macfarlane, Paralegal (Wasaga Beach)
Ms. Macfarlane engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations. Her licence is suspended until she has fully co-operated, and for one month after that. A $1,000 fine is ordered, along with another $1,000 fine if she has not co-operated by July 22, 2024. She is also ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Mark Daniel Macfarlane, Paralegal (Wasaga Beach)
Mr. Macfarlane engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with four Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that. A $1,000 fine is ordered, along with another $1,000 fine if he has not co-operated by July 22, 2024. He is also ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Ms. Singh is not presently of good character, and so her licensing application is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The panel previously denied requests for adjournments by Ms. Deokaran and it proceeded in her absence. It gave her additional time to provide written submissions but none were provided. The case involved 10 complaints by clients, opposing counsel and Legal Aid Ontario. The panel made numerous findings against Ms. Deokaran, including that she failed to respond to opposing counsel and Legal Aid Ontario, misled opposing counsel and the court, misled and failed to serve her clients, fabricated documents, instructed her law partner to send misleading communications to opposing counsel, falsely accused her law partner of assault, falsified her law partner’s signature on Teranet forms, breached her duty of loyalty to her former client and failed to maintain her client’s confidential information, communicated directly with a represented person after being advised not to do so, practised law while under suspension, threatened to report an immigrant client to prevent him from returning to Canada, and making false accusations about another lawyer to the court. A penalty and costs hearing is to be scheduled.
Adam Christopher White, Lawyer (Keswick)
Mr. White provided falsified endorsements to his client scheduling and adjourning his client’s matter. The true state of the matter was discovered when the client retained a new lawyer. A second client’s matter was dismissed by the court, but Mr. White falsified court documents and correspondence to persuade the client the matter was ongoing. The client discovered this when he reached out to opposing counsel. Mr. White was found earlier to have failed to co-operate with six separate investigations. Mr. White advised the Tribunal by email that he had resigned and was no longer a member of the Law Society. This was incorrect; Mr. White had not followed the prescribed process for surrendering his licence. The panel revoked Mr. White's licence and ordered him to pay $5,440.50 in costs to the Law Society.
Alain Timothe Mfudi Tayeye, avocat (Ottawa)
Une demande d’ajournement par M. Tayeye a été refusée. M. Tayeye est réputé reconnaitre la véracité des faits et l’authenticité des documents figurant dans une demande d’aveux à laquelle il n’a jamais répondu. M. Tayeye a omis de se conformer à un engagement au Barreau lorsqu’il n’a pas déposé des honoraires dans son compte en fiducie avant d’avoir rendu la facture à sa cliente. M. Tayeye est assujetti à une suspension de six semaines. Les dépens sont fixes à 7 000 $.
Aurelio Pascuzzi, Lawyer (Vaughan)
Mr. Pascuzzi allowed an individual who was not his client to direct activity related to his trust account including issuing cheques when there were insufficient funds in the account to cover the cheques. He also received and disbursed funds through his trust account when the funds were not related to his law practice. The panel found that Mr. Pascuzzi clearly participated in a dishonest scheme and accepted his admissions. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission and Mr. Pascuzzi's licence was revoked. He was also ordered to pay $13,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Tribunal had earlier found that Mr. Hutton was incapacitated and ordered a suspension of his licence. Mr. Hutton appealed these decisions and brought motions for a stay of the suspension order and for an order restricting openness relating to materials and evidence relating to his personal finances. The panel dismissed both motions. The panel found that although the low threshold for a serious issue to be tried was met and that the appellant would suffer some irreparable harm, the balance of convenience, in particular the protection of the public and the weakness of his prospect of success, weighed against his interests, and dismissed his request for a stay. The panel also found that Mr. Hutton's privacy request regarding his financial hardships did not relate to core aspects of his personal life or dignity interests, despite some degree of privacy loss. The panel dismissed his motion under Rule 13.
- 21/06/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Ali Amiri, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 19, 2024.
Douglas Garfield Hugh Laframboise, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 19, 2024.
Robin Anne MacLeod, Paralegal (Innisfil)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on June 17, 2024.
Manpreet Kaur Hansra, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on June 17, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Harold Joseph Murphy, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 24 & 25, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Christopher John Di Giacomo, Lawyer (Niagara Falls)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 24, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Jeremy Merrick Magence, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 27, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Deborah Ann Williams, Paralegal Applicant (Whitby)
A motion within an appeal by the licence applicant will be heard on June 27, 2024 at 1:30 p.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Adam Christopher White, Lawyer (Keswick)
Mr. White engaged in professional misconduct by failing to act with integrity and failing to uphold the standards and reputation of the profession. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $5,440.50 in costs to the Law Society.
Vishal Pravinkumar Chotai, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The allegations were not established, and so the application is dismissed.
Harkunwar Singh Klair, Lawyer (Markham)
Mr. Klair's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Alisa Mazo, Lawyer (Toronto)
In the conduct proceeding, the Law Society brought serious allegations of professional misconduct involving substantial amounts of money. Ms. Mazo alleged that the Law Society improperly communicated with her banks to obtain confidential documents and information without her consent. The panel reviewed solicitor-client, litigation and ad-hoc privilege and noted that care is required to not extend the crime-fraud exclusion and improperly remove the protection given by privilege.
Ms. Mazo sought disclosure of emails between the investigator and her team manager as well as between the investigator and Law Society lawyers, submitting that they were relevant to her abuse of process motion. Other emails were sent between a Law Society lawyer and capacity advisor, amongst others. The panel was not satisfied that the emails were relevant to Ms. Mazo's motion. The emails were also subject to privilege and the panel found that the crime-fraud exclusion did not apply. The motion was therefore dismissed.
Mark Wade Smith, Lawyer (Kanata)
The panel found that Mr. Smith had failed to keep his clients informed of the progress of their matter, as well as failing to communicate in a timely and effective manner. It further found that he failed to follow instructions and failed to perform the work in a conscientious, diligent and timely manner, misled his clients into believing he had filed documents when he had not, and misled the Law Society and the Tribunal when he failed to disclose information about his bank accounts, as well as depositing funds into his joint personal account (held with his wife) and not his general bank account. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission following the Anthony-Cookand Bradley jurisprudence and granted Mr. Smith permission to surrender his licence. He was also ordered to pay costs of $11,000 to the Law Society.
- 07/06/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Robert Andrew Leck, Lawyer (Newmarket)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 3, 2024.
Richard Walker Bowers, Paralegal (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 31, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Vivek Nijhawan, Lawyer Applicant (Ottawa)
A licensing hearing will be held on from June 10-12, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Ranjit Singh Gill, Paralegal (Cambridge)
A conduct hearing will be held from June 11-13, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Sharie-Ann Campbell, Lawyer (Bowmanville)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 14, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Robert William MacRae, Lawyer (Sault. Ste. Marie)
Mr. MacRae engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Gary John McCallum, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. McCallum engaged in professional misconduct by failing to act honourably and with integrity. A reprimand is ordered, along with several courses and $15,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Lior Samfiru, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Samfiru engaged in professional misconduct by failing to discharge all of his responsibilities honourably and with integrity, and by communicating in a manner that was abusive, offensive, or otherwise improper for a lawyer. A reprimand is ordered, along with $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Myles Frederick McLellan, Lawyer Applicant (Barrie)
Mr. McLellan's appeal is allowed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Harold Joseph Murphy, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society brought a motion for an order prohibiting Mr. Murphy from serving more requests to admit (RTAs) as well as an order that he was deemed to admit the Law Society’s RTA. Mr. Murphy then served ten RTAs and attempted to serve two more. The panel concluded that there was limited time for more RTAs to be served prior to the scheduled hearing, and that the Law Society could issue the same template response if necessary and appropriate. The Law Society’s RTA itself also violated the rules pertaining to RTAs. The motion was dismissed and no costs awarded.
Harkunwar Singh Klair, Lawyer (Markham)
The Law Society brought a motion for an interlocutory suspension, and Mr. Klair requested an adjournment on the basis that he had only recently retained counsel. The adjournment was granted, but only on the term that there be an interim interlocutory suspension. There were reasonable grounds to believe there was a significant risk of harm to the public or the public interest in the administration of justice, because there was evidence of misappropriation of $105,473.32, and that Mr. Klair had failed to co-operate with the Law Society’s investigation.
Alisa Mazo, Lawyer (Toronto)
In the context of multiple requests for not-public orders, the panel provided reasons regarding its jurisdiction to make further orders. It found that the panel was not functus, but regardless, would have jurisdiction to supervise the Tribunal record and issue appropriate redactions.
Ruth-Anne Dawn Avruskin, Lawyer (Orangeville)
Ms. Avruskin executed an undertaking not to practise as of March 4, 2022. Her licence was later administratively suspended and then suspended as a result of disciplinary proceedings. Ms. Avruskin requested an indefinite adjournment on the basis that her health prevented her from preparing and presenting her case. No evidence beyond a brief doctor’s letter was provided. The letter did not address the issue of accommodation. Ms. Avruskin's request for an indefinite adjournment was therefore denied.
Ms. Avruskin failed to respond to numerous requests for information. She did not provide sufficient information to conclude that she was unable to meet her regulatory obligations. There was no explanation for how she could continue to perform services even though she was unable to respond to the Law Society. Ms. Avruskin gave two people advice, prepared court documents, and represented them and filed documents in their proceedings while the undertaking/suspension was in effect. Submissions on penalty and costs will be made in writing, absent any objection to be addressed if the need arises.
Hermie Yaba Abraham, Lawyer (Toronto)
The parties provided an agreed statement of facts and Ms. Abraham admitted the misconduct alleged. She transferred funds from her trust account to her general account to cover expenses (she would later reimburse the trust account). Ms. Abraham also withdrew funds before delivering an account. The panel accepted that while there were some mitigating factors, there were no exceptional circumstances to rebut the presumptive revocation that follows a finding of misappropriation. Ms. Abraham's licence was therefore revoked and she was ordered to pay $3,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Diamond appealed from multiple decisions of the Hearing Division. The Law Society cross-appealed on the penalty decision. The appeal was dismissed except for the appeal of the recusal decision, which was allowed (two panel members dissenting). The cross-appeal was dismissed.
The appeal panel found that the Hearing Division correctly stated the applicable law in addressing Mr. Diamond's stay motion, while Mr. Diamond did not establish that the panel made a palpable and overriding error in making its findings on the stay motion.
The appeal panel found that the hearing panel chair’s conduct during the hearing and prior to the recusal motion did not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. However, the hearing panel erred when it held that the chair’s social media activity did not create a reasonable apprehension of bias. The appeal panel found that the effect of the chair’s tweets in 2017 relating to the advertising issue would cause a reasonable and informed person to develop a perception that the chair was biased against Mr. Diamond's firm and therefore against Mr. Diamond, who was the face of the firm.
Mr. Diamond did not waive his right to object to the chair’s participation in the hearing. The timing of the objection and the manner in which the lawyer raised the objected did not amount to an implied waiver.
The appeal panel further found that the hearing panel’s decision to reject the parties’ joint penalty submission did not warrant appellate intervention. The hearing panel did not err when it applied the legal test from the leading case of Anthony-Cook. The hearing panel correctly identified the rationale for the transitional period and found that it did not apply to Mr. Diamond. The hearing panel did not err in its treatment of Tribunal precedent.
The hearing panel correctly articulated the applicable test regarding Mr. Diamond's motion to withdraw his admissions following the panel’s rejection of the joint submission on penalty. Mr. Diamond was advised by his counsel variously that it was unlikely, there was no realistic likelihood, it was inconceivable, and that the hearing panel would reject the joint submission. The appeal panel noted that a remote possibility is still a possibility. Mr. Diamond was not unaware of the consequences of his admissions or uninformed.
Mr. Diamond did not establish an error in principle or that the penalty imposed by the hearing panel was clearly unfit. The panel rejected the Law Society’s argument that the Law Society Act does not allow for the order made, finding that the Act provides the hearing panel with the discretion to make such an order. The hearing panel’s determination of what constitutes exceptional circumstances is a discretionary decision which is entitled to deference.
The matter was returned to the Hearing Division, before a differently-constituted hearing panel, for penalty submissions. No costs were ordered.
- 31/05/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Michael Peter Joseph Panacci, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on May 28, 2024.
Nicholas Julian Cartel, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on May 27, 2024.
Julian J Hutchinson, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 24, 2024.
Elnaz Mazinani, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 24, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Gary John McCallum, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 5, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Lior Samfiru, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 5, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Christopher John Di Giacomo, Lawyer (Niagara Falls)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 7, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Vikram Singh Dhillon, Lawyer (Brampton)
Mr. Dhillon engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Derek Francesco Sorrenti, Lawyer (North York)
Mr. Sorrenti engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Diamond's appeal is dismissed, except for the appeal of the recusal motion, which is allowed. The Law Society's cross-appeal is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Jordan Camillo Cristoferi-Paolucci, Lawyer Applicant (Ottawa)
Mr. Cristoferi-Paolucci indicated on his licensing application that he had been convicted of seven child pornography and luring offences, but that his convictions had been set aside because of unreasonable delay in the criminal case. He had been a youth basketball coach and, over a period of about one year, he requested and sometimes paid 13 youth players, some of whom were under 18, for explicit photos. The parties agreed that these circumstances raised concerns about Mr. Cristoferi-Paolucci's good character and the Law Society referred his application to the Tribunal for a determination, but during the hearing the Law Society advised that it would not oppose his application. The panel found that the misconduct was serious, but that he had gained insight, was remorseful, had engaged in rehabilitation efforts and there had been no further misconduct since 2013. The panel concluded that Mr. Cristoferi-Paolucci demonstrated that he is currently of good character and is eligible to be licensed to practise law.
- 24/05/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Richard Keith Watson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 16, 2024.
David Stephen Strashin, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 16, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Dennis Kashmeel Keevantoza McKoena, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 27 & 28, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Timothy Michael Kinnaird, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held from May 27 - 31, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Silky Attri, Paralegal (Etobicoke)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on May 28, 2024 at 1:30 p.m.
Alisa Mazo, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on May 30 & 31, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Harkunwar Singh Klair, Lawyer (Markham)
The hearing is adjourned to June 17, 2024, and Mr. Klair's licence is suspended on an interim interlocutory basis.
Sarah Zakir, Lawyer (Markham)
Ms. Zakir engaged in professional misconduct by failing to prevent the unauthorized provision of legal services, dividing fees improperly, and advertising in a way that was not demonstrably true or accurate. A reprimand is ordered, along with $4,900 in costs to the Law Society.
Jordan Camillo Cristoferi-Paolucci, Lawyer Applicant (Ottawa)
Mr. Cristoferi-Paolucci is presently of good character, and so is eligible to be granted an L1 licence.
Sheriza Reyan Mohammed-Ali, Lawyer (Etobicoke)
Ms. Mohammed-Ali engaged in professional misconduct by creating, proffering, or otherwise relying upon fraudulent financial instruments and documents relating to estate matters, failing to maintain books and records, and creating, proffering, or otherwise relying upon a fraudulent retainer agreement. Her licence is revoked, and she is ordered to pay $30,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, Lawyer (London)
Mr. Hamza had been found to have engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate in investigations by the Law Society and failing to pay costs owed to the Law Society. He was already suspended and subject to a one-month additional suspension, and demonstrated ongoing incivility toward the regulator, Tribunal and the court. The panel found that he was ungovernable based on evidence that he was unwilling to be governed, and decided that revocation was appropriate, as no mitigating factors were demonstrated. The panel also found that a penalty of revocation was appropriate based on Mr. Hamza's misconduct, including his prior disciplinary record, the duration and extent of his misconduct, his inability to grasp the effect of his misconduct, and his antagonistic and vexatious communications and legal actions. The panel therefore revoked Mr. Hamza's licence and ordered costs of $68,400 to the Law Society.
- 17/05/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Cyriacus Obi Agbarakwe, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on May 9, 2024.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, Lawyer (London)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on May 9, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Kareem Olando Vinton, Lawyer (Pickering)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction will be heard on May 21 & 22, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Sheriza Mohammed-Ali, Lawyer (Etobicoke)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 22, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
William Francis Murray, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 24, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Allan Charles Corsini, Paralegal (Dundas)
Mr. Corsini engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, he is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine, and a further $2,000 fine if he has not co-operated by June 10, 2024. He is also ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Jorge Lopez, Paralegal (Toronto)
The panel concluded that Mr. Lopez had been properly served with the Law Society’s materials and notice of the hearing, and proceeded in his absence. In 2018, Mr. Lopez was granted an exemption from filing requirements based on incapacity. He undertook not to provide legal services while exempt. He then provided legal services, including appearing in court, despite the undertaking, and without the required errors and omissions insurance coverage. Mr. Lopez also failed to respond to communications from the Law Society. The panel found that Mr. Lopez's actions displayed a disregard for the profession and his clients, and so his licence was suspended on an interlocutory basis.
David Hao, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Hao consented to the order sought. The panel found that the Law Society had satisfied the statutory preconditions for an order and concluded that a suspension was necessary, and so Mr. Hao was suspended on an interlocutory basis.
John William McDonald, Lawyer (Cambridge)
The Law Society inadvertently disclosed a copy of its Authorization Memorandum (AM) to Mr. McDonald in the context of a professional misconduct proceeding. It brought a motion requesting the return of paper copies of the AM, destruction of electronic copies and notes, and an order restraining Mr. McDonald from using any information obtained through viewing the AM. Based on factors including the way the documents were released, the timing of the discovery and promptness of the Law Society’s attempt to retrieve the documents, and the lack of unfairness to Mr. McDonald, the panel made the order requested by the Law Society.
Timothy James Hilborn, Lawyer (Cambridge)
A spot audit and investigation revealed errors and overdrawn balances in Mr. Hilborn's trust accounts, a failure to maintain books and records, as well as pre-taking of executor compensation fees and conflation of duties between executor and solicitor. Based on an agreed statement of facts and joint submission, the panel found professional misconduct and accepted the joint submission for a penalty of a 30-day suspension and costs of $2,500 to the Law Society.
- 10/05/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Cyriacus Obi Agbarakwe, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on May 9, 2024.
John William McDonald, Lawyer (Cambridge)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on May 7, 2024.
George Socrates Florentis, Lawyer (Sudbury)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 24, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
William Francis Murray, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 16 & 17, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Harkunwar Singh Klair, Lawyer (Markham)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on May 17, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Sarah Zakir, Lawyer (Markham)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 17, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Robson will pay $94,991.85 in costs to the Law Society.
Armenak Martin Dumanian, Lawyer Applicant (Oakville)
The panel orders that Mr. Dumanian will pay $12,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Marilou Nejal, Lawyer (North York)
Ms. Nejal entered an Agreed Statement of Facts and admitted that she engaged in professional misconduct by, in the context of five syndicated mortgages: failing to obtain her clients’ written consent to a joint retainer and explaining the consequences of such a joint retainer; failing to provide legal services to her clients to the standard of a competent lawyer; misstating facts and law in a wrongful suit against her client and acting in a conflict of interest by preferring her own interest over the interest of her client. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission for a penalty of a six-month suspension, a practice restriction thereafter, additional CPD courses, an order to repay fees and disbursements to her lender clients and costs of $35,000.
Nathan William Currie, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Currie admitted to owing a substantial amount of money that he cannot pay back, including child support. He had failed to attend a trial in Alberta to which he had been subpoenaed as well as another court appearance for a foreclosure on his property. A forensic psychiatrist’s opinion stated that he suffers from an ongoing cannabis use disorder. The panel found Mr. Currie lacked self-awareness and had no remorse for his past actions. The panel also found that he lacked integrity and ethical strength. Mr. Currie's application for a paralegal licence was therefore dismissed.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel earlier found that Mr. Robson engaged in professional misconduct by failing to treat an opposing party and her counsel with courtesy, civility and good faith. He also failed to discharge all of his responsibilities to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice honourably and with integrity and failed to encourage public respect for the administration of justice. The panel found his lengthy disciplinary history together with the serious misconduct in this case led to the conclusion that he was unwilling or unable to be governed by the Law Society. Mr. Robson's licence was therefore revoked, and he was ordered to pay $94.991.85 in costs to the Law Society.
- 03/05/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Bruce Gordon Joseph Moquin, Paralegal (Casselman)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 1, 2024.
Daniel Bruno Bérubé, Paralegal (Haileybury)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 30, 2024.
George Bekiaris, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 26, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Vishal Pravinkumar Chotai, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 7 and 8, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Antonio Caruso, Paralegal (Niagara Falls)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on May 9, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
John Calvin Edwin Barry, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 9, 2024 at 1:00 p.m.
Gregory Charles Hertzberger, Lawyer (Kitchener)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 10, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Robin Morch, Lawyer (Longeuil, QC)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 10, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, Lawyer (London)
Mr. Hamza engaged in professional misconduct by attempting to obstruct a Law Society investigation and by failing to co-operate with the Law Society. He also engaged in conduct unbecoming by committing acts of reprisal against complainants. Mr. Hamza failed to act with integrity and failed to comply with a court order. Mr. Hamza failed to be courteous, civil, and act in good faith. Mr. Hamza's licence to practise law was revoked and he was ordered to pay $68,400 in costs to the Law Society.
Singa Bui, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Bui's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis.
Nicholas Julian Cartel, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Cartel's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis.
Nathan William Currie, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Currie is not presently of good character and his application for a paralegal licence was dismissed.
Ping-Teng Tan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Tan's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis.
John William McDonald, Lawyer (Cambridge)
Mr. McDonald engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. Mr. McDonald was reprimanded and ordered to pay $20,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Singa Bui, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society brought a motion for an interlocutory suspension because its investigation provided evidence that Ms. Bui had mishandled or misappropriated significant funds from client trust accounts in relation to three client files. Ms. Bui is not practising and did not participate in the proceeding because of her mental health. The panel proceeded in her absence, but noted that Ms. Bui can request that its order be set aside if able to do so. The panel found that there was strong evidence of misappropriating trust funds and that the test for an interlocutory suspension was met, as there were reasonable grounds for believing that there is a significant risk of harm to members of the public or to the public interest in the administration of justice. The panel ordered an interlocutory suspension of Ms. Bui’s licence to practise law.
Nicholas Cartel, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society brought a motion for an interlocutory suspension because its investigation provided evidence that significant funds from client trust accounts had been mishandled or misappropriated. Mr. Cartel claimed that he had no knowledge of these transactions, as he practised in a firm with his wife, who was responsible for the trust accounts. He did not disclose any discussion with his law partner/wife or other steps taken to understand what happened, although there was evidence regarding her mental health. The panel found that there was strong evidence of misappropriation of trust funds and that the test for an interlocutory suspension was met, as there were reasonable grounds for believing that there is a significant risk of harm to members of the public or to the public interest in the administration of justice. The panel ordered an interlocutory suspension of Mr. Cartel’s licence to practise law.
Dorsay Shafie, Paralegal (Toronto)
At the first hearing date, an adjournment was granted peremptory on Ms. Shafie. Ms. Shafie requested a second adjournment on the eve of the hearing. The panel denied the request for a second adjournment because there had been previous delay, the request was made at the last minute, and there was insufficient evidence regarding mental health as the basis for the adjournment request. Ms. Shafie had been suspended in 2021 and still had not provided complete responses to the Law Society’s requests for information and documents. The panel found professional misconduct had been established, and ordered Ms. Shafie’s licence suspended indefinitely pending compliance with the requests and for two months to follow. Ms. Shafie was ordered to pay $10,000 in costs, a definite fine of $2,500 and a conditional fine of $2,500 pending compliance with the Law Society investigator’s requests.
- 26/04/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Crystale Dawn Macfarlane, Paralegal (Wasaga Beach)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 25, 2024.
Mark Daniel Macfarlane, Paralegal (Wasaga Beach)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 25, 2024.
Mark Breslow, Paralegal (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 25, 2024.
Robert MacRae, Lawyer (Sault Ste. Marie)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 19, 2024.
Harkunwar Singh Klair, Lawyer (Markham)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on April 19, 2024.
Kareem Olando Vinton, Lawyer (Pickering)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on April 17, 2024.
Nancy Myles Elliott, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 17, 2024.
Sebastien Gauthier, parajuriste (Ottawa)
Un avis de requête sur la conduite a été déposé le 16 avril 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Joseph Francesco Lo Greco, Lawyer (Aurora)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 29, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Ping-Teng Tan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on April 29, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Melanie Gloria Christine Zopf, Paralegal (Scarborough)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on April 30, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Alec McLeod McLennan, Lawyer (Oakville)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on May 1, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Winfield Edward Corcoran, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 3, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Chantel Dorothy Twizell, Paralegal (New Lowell)
Ms. Twizell engaged in professional misconduct by altering a Letter of Employment and then causing it to be submitted as genuine. Her licence is suspended for four months, and she is ordered to pay $2,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Alisa Mazo, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel orders that Ms. Mazo will pay $19,032.97 in costs to the Law Society.
Alain Timothe Mfudi Tayeye, avocat (Ottawa)
M. Tayeye s'est conduit d’une façon qui constitue un manquement professionnel en déposant les fonds reçus dans son compte en fiducie avant d'avoir rendu la facture à sa cliente. M. Tayeye est suspendu immédiatement pour une période de deux mois, et devra également verser au Barreau des dépens de 7,500 $.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Michael Allison Constable, Lawyer (North Bay)
The panel found that Mr. Constable failed to co-operate with nine LSO investigations into complaints related to 15 clients. He also failed to respond to communications from clients and the LSO (emails and faxes were undeliverable at the contact information he provided), abandoned his practice, after which the LSO obtained a trusteeship over it, failed to supervise his non-lawyer staff, an articling student and bookkeeper, abandoned his clients, repeatedly failing to attend court appearances, settlement conferences, and client meetings and failed to respond to communications from clients, opposing counsel, CAS counsel and court staff. His licence was therefore revoked, and he was ordered to pay approximately $13,000 in costs to the Law Society. He was also ordered to pay specified amounts to clients.
Nahid Rahimi, Paralegal (North York)
The hearing was lengthy and factually complex. The panel heard from many witnesses, almost all of whom required interpreters. Ms. Rahimi provided services together with a lawyer for a period of time. The panel found that in 2015 she was working as a legal assistant in the lawyer’s office, and by 2018 Ms. Rahimi was providing services either through the lawyer’s office or as an independent paralegal. Ms. Rahimi failed to deposit funds into a trust account, either on her own or in circumstances when she was working for the lawyer. She did not communicate effectively with clients, especially when she was critical to communication between the client and the lawyer. She misled a client by falsely advising that an extension to appeal had been granted when it had not. She also failed to return a file to a client when requested. The panel found that Ms. Rahimi acted without integrity and breached client confidentiality when she sent “poison pen” letters to the Refugee Protection Division about her clients and when she threatened to disclose potentially harmful information about a former client to a foreign government. She breached her duty of loyalty to the client and undermined the confidence of the public in the legal professions. Ms. Rahimi continued providing legal services to a client in a sponsorship application after the lawyer ceased practice and provided another client with services in connect with indictable offices. These are outside the scope of practice for paralegals. She also provided confidential information about the sponsorship application to a third party. A penalty hearing is to be scheduled.
Alisa Mazo, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society sought costs of about $19,000 following Ms. Mazo's unsuccessful Rule 13 motion. The panel had dismissed her motion that the entire proceeding be not public. The panel considered that the motion was factually complex with a substantial motion record and that the issues were significant for both parties, finding that Ms. Mazo's conduct warranted an award of costs against her, considering that she deliberately chose not to adduce evidence on whether openness posed a serious risk to her personal safety. The panel held the amount sought was within the reasonable expectation of the parties and ordered Ms. Mazo to pay $19,032.97 in costs to the Law Society.
Chantel Dorothy Twizell, Paralegal (New Lowell)
Following a CUPE motion, Ms. Twizell admitted that the decision of the Social Security Tribunal established conduct unbecoming. The SST found that Ms. Twizell had wilfully tampered with an employment letter and sent it to a mortgage broker. The SST held Ms. Twizell was terminated by her employer as a result. The panel did not accept the Law Society’s position that this conduct resulted in a presumptive revocation. While the conduct raised serious issues of integrity it was not analogous to knowing participation in mortgage fraud or misappropriation. After reviewing the Aguirre factors the panel determined that the appropriate outcome was a suspension of four months. Ms. Twizell was also ordered to pay $2,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Armenak Martin Dumanian, Lawyer Applicant (Oakville)
Following allegations of sexual misconduct during his Master’s studies at the University of Alberta, Mr. Dumanian applied for licensing as a lawyer. His answer to a question asking whether allegations of misconduct had been made while attending a post-secondary institution resulted in a Law Society investigation of his good character. The appeal panel found that there was ample evidence to support the key finding of the hearing panel that the appellant carefully crafted his responses on the licensing application to avoid raising red flags. The appeal was dismissed and a timetable set out should the Law Society seek costs.
- 19/04/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Gregory Harrington Harris, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 17, 2024.
Timothy John Fedy, Lawyer (Waterloo)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 15, 2024.
Christopher John Di Giacomo, Lawyer (Niagara Falls)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 12, 2024.
Ping-Teng Tan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on April 12, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Alisa Mazo, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on April 22, 23, 24 & 26, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Richard Adedayo Odeleye, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on April 22 & 23, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, Lawyer (London)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 24, 2024 at 9:15 a.m.
John William McDonald, Lawyer (Cambridge)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on April 26, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Joseph Francesco Lo Greco, Lawyer (Aurora)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 26, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Armenak Martin Dumanian, Lawyer Applicant (Oakville)
Mr. Dumanian's appeal is dismissed.
Maria Mikhailitchenko, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Mikhailitchenko's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Michael Allison Constable, Lawyer (North Bay)
Mr. Constable engaged in professional misconduct by failing to serve fifteen clients to the standard of a competent lawyer, improperly withdrawing from representation six times, thrice acting without integrity, failing to co-operate with nine Law Society investigations, failing to report changes to his contact information, failing to supervise non-licensee staff, and practicing law while suspended. His licence is revoked, he is ordered to pay $12,915 in costs to the Law Society, and he is ordered to pay specified amounts to five clients.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Nicholas Folorunsho Owodunni, Lawyer (Tottenham)
Mr. Owodunni admitted the allegations and that they amounted to professional misconduct. The parties did not agree on penalty and costs. The panel found Mr. Owodunnni's failures to serve in relation to the preparation of immigration and refugee documents were serious and impacted vulnerable persons. The misconduct spanned over two years and significantly prejudiced his clients. The panel concluded that Mr. Owodunni must be suspended because of the seriousness of his misconduct and his lack of insight into the consequences of his actions; he was therefore suspended for two months, and additional terms were imposed on his licence following his return to practice. He was also ordered to pay $10,000 in costs.
- 12/04/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Jennifer Alejandra Valdes Trigo, Paralegal (Etobicoke)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 9, 2024.
Granville Nolley Cadogan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 9, 2024.
Trevor Louis Kozma, Paralegal (Strathroy)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 8, 2024.
Jesse Lee James Valkenier, Paralegal (Prescott)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 4, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Richard Craig Anthony Patterson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 15 & 16, 2024 at 9:30 a.m.
Francesco Salvatore Bernard Alfano, Paralegal (Brampton)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on April 16, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. and April 19, 2024 at 11:15am.
Jane Louise Poproski, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 16, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Maria Mikhailitchenko, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on April 18, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Sean Leo Kevin Daley, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on April 18, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
John William McDonald, Lawyer (Cambridge)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on April 19, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Alain Timothe Mfudi Tayeye, avocat (Ottawa)
Une audience sommaire de conduite est prévue pour le 19 avril 2024 à 13 h 30.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Mark Wade Smith, Lawyer (Kanata)
Mr. Smith engaged in professional misconduct by failing to serve clients, failing to maintain the integrity of the profession and mishandling $5,234.21. He is granted permission to surrender his licence and ordered to pay $11,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Nicolas Carlos Canizares, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Canizares consented to the interlocutory order. The panel accepted this was not an agreement to or an admission to any of the alleged misconduct which related to allegedly fraudulent real estate transactions. The allegations presented concerns about Mr. Canizares' honesty and integrity. He also failed to participate in the ongoing investigation. The panel found reasonable grounds to believe there was a significant risk of harm to both the public and the public interest in the administration of justice if the order was not made, and so Mr. Canizares was suspended on an interlocutory basis.
- 05/04/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Maria Mikhailitchenko, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on April 2, 2024.
Vikram Singh Dhillon, Lawyer (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 2, 2024.
Michael Andrew Weinczok, Lawyer (Vancouver, B.C.)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 28, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Singa Bui, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction will be heard on April 8, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Dennis Kashmeel Keevantoza McKoena, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A conduct hearing will be held from April 8-11, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Nicholas Julian Cartel, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction will be heard on April 11, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Rabah Yaacoub Moubarak, Lawyer (Vaughan)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on April 12, 2024 at 9:30 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
David Hao, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Hao's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Morris Goldstein, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Goldstein engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Menelik Getachew Tessema, Lawyer (Maple)
Mr. Tessema engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, he is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine if he has not co-operated before May 30th, 2024, and he is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Hermie Yaba Abraham, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Abraham engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain books and records, misappropriating $23,594.17, and withdrawing trust funds without delivering an account. Her licence is revoked, and she is ordered to pay $3,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Paul Edward Wilbert Shrum, Paralegal (Hamilton)
Mr. Shrum engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Dorsay Shafie, Paralegal (Toronto)
Ms. Shafie engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with four Law Society investigations. Her licence is suspended until she has fully co-operated, and for two months after that. A $2,500 fine is ordered, along with a conditional $2,500 fine if she has not co-operated by April 15, 2024. She is also ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
There were no new reasons posted this week.
- 27/03/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Kenneth Emanuel Wise, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 26, 2024.
Gregory Charles Hertzberger, Lawyer (Kitchener)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 22, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Dorsay Shafie, Paralegal (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on April 1, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Hermie Yaba Abraham, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 3, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Myles Frederick McLellan, Lawyer Applicant (Sault Ste. Marie)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on April 3, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Richard Craig Anthony Patterson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 4, 2024 at 9:30 a.m.
Adam Christopher White, Lawyer (Keswick)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 4, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Mark Wade Smith, Lawyer (Kanata)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 5, 2024 at 1:00 p.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
John Calvin Edwin Barry, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Barry engaged in professional misconduct by failing to serve a client to the standard of a competent lawyer, failing to be candid with a client, failing to fully advise a client of potential consequences and failing to obtain consent from a client for a joint retainer. A reprimand is ordered, along with a $20,000 fine and $30,000 in costs to the Law Society.
James Robert Arnold, Lawyer (Waterloo)
Mr. Arnold's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Francesco Salvatore Bernard Alfano, Paralegal (Brampton)
Mr. Alfano's licence is suspended on an interim interlocutory basis.
Aurelio Pascuzzi, Lawyer (Vaughan)
Mr. Pascuzzi engaged in professional misconduct by using his trust account to receive and disburse funds and to receive and issue NSF cheques for purposes unrelated to the provision of legal services, twice knowingly assisting in dishonest or illegal conduct, using his trust account to dispense cash for purposes not related to the provision of legal services, and failing to act honourably and with integrity. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $13,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Gary John McCallum, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. McCallum swore an affidavit in the context of a civil action based on a claim of sexual abuse of a girl by a foster father. Mr. McCallum stated that the plaintiff’s lawyer misrepresented a number of facts, including describing the plaintiff as being in childhood, because even though she was under 18, she was a “sexually mature woman.” This accusation took place in a context of acrimony between the parties’ lawyers. The panel found that Mr. McCallum had engaged in professional misconduct under Rule 2.1-1, as the statement was unreasonable, made without his client’s instructions and was adverse to their interests. While considering issues such as expressive rights, the need for resolute advocacy and protection of clients, the panel decided that a finding of professional misconduct was appropriate, as Mr. McCallum's statement brought discredit upon the legal profession and was dishonourable, from the perspective of the administration of justice. The panel directed the Tribunal to arrange a penalty hearing.
Chi-Nam Steve Chan, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Chan admitted that his failure to prepare trust reconciliations and comparisons, maintain a proper duplicates cash receipts book or disburse trust account monies within a reasonable amount of time were breaches of the by-laws and his undertaking. The panel accepted the proposed penalty as reasonable and appropriate. Mr. Chan expressed remorse and took responsibility, and all errors had been rectified by the time of the hearing. Mr. Chan was suspended for one month and will be subject to reporting requirements for one year. He will also participate in a Spot Audit within 30 months of returning to practice, and pay costs of $3,000 to the Law Society.
Lorne Howard Albaum, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Albaum was found to have engaged in professional misconduct in three of four allegations. The Law Society unsuccessfully sought revocation. Both the Law Society and Mr. Albaum sought costs. The panel found that the Law Society’s refusal of the offer to settle did not cause costs to be incurred without reasonable cause or wasted by undue delay, negligence or other default. The Law Society did unsuccessfully argue that the trust uses were dishonest, which lengthened the hearing. In addition, the expert’s evidence was only somewhat helpful. The panel decided that allegations raised important and significant issues regarding the use of a trust account, and so the panel ordered that Mr. Albaum pay $24,000 in costs to the Law Society.
John Calvin Edwin Barry, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel had found that Mr. Barry failed to serve and be candid with a client and failed to properly advise another client respecting a joint retainer and his defence. The Law Society’s allegations regarding lack of integrity were dismissed. The panel found that the misconduct was more in the nature of mistakes or carelessness than intentional breaches of obligations. The misconduct was disrespectful and caused Mr. Barry's client to question the integrity of the justice system. Mr. Barry had practised for 36 years without disciplinary action, and the panel accepted that he had learned from the process and taken steps to prevent, as far as possible, a re-occurrence. Mr. Barry was therefore reprimanded and ordered to pay a fine of $20,000. Costs of $30,000 were also ordered to be paid to the Law Society.
Alisa Mazo, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel considered Ms. Mazo's motion for disclosure of 18 e-mails exchanged within the Law Society. She claimed she was entitled to disclosure because the e-mails contained information that (a) was the fruit of the investigation, (b) regarded the complainant, which might have helped in her Rule 13 motion, and (c) might have reflected a potential abuse of process. The Law Society resisted the order on three grounds: the e-mails were not disclosable, were covered by solicitor-client privilege, and, for three e-mails, were subject to ad-hoc privilege.
The panel concluded that the Law Society was not required to disclose any of the 18 e-mails because they did not contain disclosable information or because they were protected by solicitor-client privilege, or both. The crime/fraud exclusion did not apply; there was no waiver of privilege. The motion was dismissed and costs reserved to the panel hearing the balance of the disclosure motion.
Alisa Mazo, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Mazo made a motion for an order that the entire proceeding and all documents be not public. The panel did not grant the broad order, reasoning that Ms. Mazo could not link openness of the proceedings to her own fear regarding her personal safety. Materials that were already part of the application record remained not public.
- 22/03/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Allan Charles Corsini, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 15, 2024.
Derek Francesco Sorrenti, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 19, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Mukesh Bhardwaj, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
A conduct hearing will be held from March 25-27, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
James Robert Arnold, Lawyer (Waterloo)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on March 25, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Francesco Salvatore Bernard Alfano, Paralegal (Brampton)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on March 26, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Aurelio Pascuzzi, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held from March 26-28, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 27 & 28, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Rabah Yaacoub Moubarak, Lawyer (Vaughan)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on March 28, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Lorne Howard Albaum, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Albaum will pay $24,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Nelson Lisboa, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Lisboa engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
AA, Lawyer Applicant
The Law Society's appeal is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Brian Allen Sherman, Lawyer (Aurora)
The Law Society brought a motion for an order that findings from a conflict decision be admissible as proof of facts in a conduct application, and to bar Mr. Sherman from relitigating these findings. This arose from a situation where Mr. Sherman had continued to represent one client from a joint retainer after the relationship broke down. The former client obtained an order removing Mr. Sherman from the ongoing proceedings. Based on the doctrine of abuse of process by relitigation and Mr. Sherman's participation in the conflict proceedings, the panel ordered that findings from the conflict decision be admissible as proof of facts and that the licensee may not relitigate findings of fact from this hearing.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, Lawyer (London)
The Law Society received complaints following posts Mr. Hamza made online. Another complaint was received from another licensee following interactions with Mr. Hamza during an estate matter. The panel found that Mr. Hamza had communicated with other licensees in a manner that clearly showed a lack of courtesy and civility. The communications also made unfounded allegations of negligence. Mr. Hamza failed to observe his duty to be courteous, civil and act in good faith.
Mr. Hamza refused to meet with the LSO investigator investigating the complaints. He also delivered an issued notice of application against the LSO and the complainants as reprisal for the complaints. Following a court appearance regarding the notice, Mr. Hamza failed to follow the Court’s order as to further materials to be filed. The application was dismissed and a subsequent action also dismissed as frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of process. The panel found that during the course of the application, action and appeal (also dismissed), Mr. Hamza communicated in a way that raised issues of incivility and a lack of courtesy; he had failed to act honourably and with integrity. A hearing on penalty and costs will be scheduled.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
Having earlier found Mr. Barnwell participated in two fraudulent transactions and given him permission to surrender his licence, the panel considered the issue of costs. The hearing was procedurally complex and took 47 days: 28 for the merits and 19 on three unsuccessful motions brought by Mr. Barnwell. The panel found the Law Society’s bill of costs to be reasonable and within the range of costs awarded for other long hearings. Mr. Barnwell is the sole earner in his household and has two dependent children. He was ordered to pay $207,000 in costs to the Law Society and pay to the Compensation Fund any amount paid by the Fund after the date of the order to a maximum of $100,000.
AA, Lawyer Applicant
The Law Society appealed a decision finding AA to be presently of good character and eligible to be licensed as a lawyer. AA had engaged in incidents of sexual abuse of minor children in 2009 and previously applied to be licensed in 2012, but was not forthcoming about these incidents, and discontinued his application. He later re-applied for a licence to practise law and was found by the Hearing Division to be presently of good character. That panel further ordered a restriction that he not meet with minor children while unsupervised. The Law Society appealed this decision, arguing that the Hearing Division erred in its assessment of the evidence and in relation to the restriction on AA's licence. The appeal panel found that the Hearing Division did not misapprehend the evidence, that there had been no procedural unfairness in the ordering of a practice restriction, as this issue was clearly dealt with during the hearing, and that this restriction was not inconsistent with the finding of good character. The appeal was dismissed, and parties were invited to make submissions regarding costs.
- 15/03/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Sharie-Ann Campbell, Lawyer (Bowmanville)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 12, 2024.
Farzaneh Prithvi Raj Mukherjee, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 8, 2024.
Derek Francesco Sorrenti, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 3, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held from March 19-22, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Rabah Yaacoub Moubarak, Lawyer (Vaughan)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on March 21, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Nicolas Carlos Canizares, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Canizares' licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Barnwell will pay $207,000 in costs to the Law Society, and repay the Compensation Fund up to $100,000.
Jorge Lopez, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Lopez's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Danielle Shannon Harrison, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The Law Society brought a motion for an interlocutory suspension. An interlocutory suspension had previously been ordered, but the Appeal Division found that there were procedural fairness issues in that hearing and allowed the appeal, setting aside the order. The Law Society’s investigation concerned whether Ms. Harrison participated in or facilitated a predatory mortgage loan scheme involving vulnerable senior citizens, misled the Law Society about her continued involvement with recurrent participants in the scheme, and used a trust account as a sole practitioner without disclosing this to the Law Society as required. The panel found that it was permitted to order an interlocutory suspension, as there appeared to be a significant risk of harm to the public and/or to the public interest in the administration of justice, and further, that it should order an interlocutory suspension, as serious integrity issues were raised by evidence suggesting that Ms. Harrison did not disclose the use of her personal trust account to the Law Society or her employer, and appeared to be hiding transactions after learning about the Law Society’s investigation. An interlocutory suspension was therefore ordered, with costs of the motion reserved to the panel presiding at the hearing of the merits of the proceeding.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (York)
After dismissing Mr. Robson's motion, the panel considered the issue of costs. Mr. Robson did not provide submissions on costs. The panel held that the Law Society was required to incur costs to respond to Mr. Robson's motion, which was meritless, and found the Law Society’s request to be proportionate. Mr. Robson was therefore ordered to pay costs of $6,040 to the Law Society.
A A, Lawyer Applicant (Undefined)
AA was found by the Hearing Division to be of good character. He had engaged in incidents of sexual abuse of minor children in 2009 and previously applied to be licensed in 2012, but was not forthcoming about these incidents, and withdrew his application at that time. He later re-applied for a licence to practise law and was found to be presently of good character, with a restriction that he not meet with minor children while unsupervised. The Law Society appealed this decision and brought a motion for a stay of the licensing order. The majority found that the test for a stay of the order was met, as there was a serious question for appeal, irreparable harm to public confidence in the regulation of the profession would be caused if not granted, and the balance of convenience favoured a stay.
The dissenting minority disagreed, finding that irreparable harm was not caused by negative publicity in the context of a fair and well-established procedure to establish good character, and the balance of convenience weighed against granting a stay because of the adverse effect on AA. The panel agreed that the appeal hearing should be expedited and that costs of the motion should be determined by the panel hearing the appeal.
- 08/03/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Robin Morch, Lawyer (Longeuil, QC)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 6, 2024.
John William McDonald, Lawyer (Cambridge)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 5, 2024.
James Robert Arnold, Lawyer (Waterloo)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on March 4, 2024.
Girolamo Falletta, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 3, 2024.
Jasminder Singh, Lawyer (Brampton)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on February 29, 2024.
Alpesh Patel, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 28, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Winfield Edward Corcoran, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A conduct hearing will be held from March 11-14, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
David Hao, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on March 11-13, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Dorsay Shafie, Paralegal (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on March 15, 2024 at 1:30 p.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Robson will pay $6,040 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Richard Desmond Jackman, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Based on deemed admissions, the panel found that Mr. Jackman engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond to the Law Society. The panel rejected his position that he was not a licensee and not obligated to participate in the Law Society’s investigation regarding a complaint that he was providing legal services while suspended. He had a previous discipline history, including suspension for non-payment of fees in 1985, failure to co-operate in 2017 and failing to pay a fine in 2020. Mr. Jackman consented to the requested order that he was ungovernable and for the revocation of his licence. The panel found that the nature, duration and repetitive character of his misconduct were serious and no mitigating factors were submitted, and so his licence was revoked and costs of $10,000 were ordered.
- 01/03/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Francesco Salvatore Bernard Alfano, Paralegal (Brampton)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on February 28, 2024.
Nicholas Julian Cartel, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on February 28, 2024.
Singa Bui, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on February 28, 2024.
Alain Timothe Mfudi Tayeye, avocat (Ottawa)
Un avis de requête sur la conduite a été déposé le 27 février 2024.
Demitry Papasotiriou-Lanteigne, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 27, 2024.
Andrew Gordon Rogerson, Lawyer (Barrie)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on February 26, 2024.
Antonio Agozzino, Lawyer (King)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 26, 2024.
Nicolas Canizares, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on February 15, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Jorge Lopez, Paralegal (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on March 6, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Nicolas Canizares, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on March 7, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Elnaz Mazinani, Lawyer (North York)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on March 8, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Deborah Ann Williams, Paralegal Applicant (Whitby)
A motion within an appeal by the licensee will be heard on March 8, 2024 at 1:30 p.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Andrew Gordon Rogerson, Lawyer (Barrie)
The Hearing Division's January 31, 2024 order is stayed.
Danielle Shannon Harrison, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Ms. Harrison's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Matthew William O’Neil, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. O'Neil, although properly served, did not attend the hearing, and the majority of the panel decided to proceed in his absence. He had previously requested an adjournment which had been denied, and a minority of the panel was not convinced that he was aware of this decision. The panel found that Mr. O'Neil misappropriated approximately $22,621 funds from his employer law firm, failed to serve clients in relation to their immigration applications, misled the firm and his clients regarding the status of these applications, and falsified documents. There was no evidence of exceptional circumstances to warrant a departure from the presumptive penalty of revocation of licence in cases of misappropriation. Mr. O'Neil's licence was therefore revoked and costs of $34,000 were ordered.
Sujata Sharan, Lawyer (Burlington)
The Law Society brought a motion for an interlocutory suspension of Ms. Sharan's licence to practise. She was alleged to have purchased the home of an elderly neighbour who may have lacked capacity, and to have attempted to mislead the Law Society investigator. The panel ordered an interlocutory suspension, as it found that there was a significant risk of harm to the public and/or to the public interest in the administration of justice. Costs of the motion were reserved to the panel presiding over the hearing on the merits of the application.
Rabah Yaacoub Moubarak, Lawyer (Vaughan)
Mr. Moubarak brought a motion to remove Law Society counsel on the grounds that she made misrepresentations to his counsel during discussions around the agreed statement of facts. The panel concluded that Law Society counsel was not a likely witness and would not, as counsel for the Law Society in the ASF motion, be defending the meaning and effect of her own words. The panel noted that counsel should be removed from the record only in the clearest of cases, and it did not believe that a fair-minded and reasonably informed member of the public would conclude that removing counsel would be necessary for the proper administration of justice. The motion was therefore dismissed.
Alec McLeod McLennan, Lawyer (Oakville)
Mr. McLennan raised many of the same arguments at the stay motion as were raised and dismissed at the Hearing Division. Assuming that there was a serious issue to be tried on appeal, the motion panel found that the appellant did not demonstrate that a stay would make any difference in alleviating the principal harm he cited: his inability to earn an income. The panel concluded that Mr. McLennan did not satisfy the stay criteria, and so his motion for stay was dismissed, with costs reserved to the panel hearing the appeal.
- 23/02/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Nicolas Canizares, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on February 15, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Georgiana Stefania Masgras-Irshidat, Lawyer (Kitchener)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 27, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Giuseppe Jr. Campisi, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Peter Ian Murray, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings will be held from February 26 - March 1, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Ruth-Anne Dawn Avruskin, Lawyer (Orangeville)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on March 1, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Marilou Nejal, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Nejal engaged in professional misconduct by failing to obtain clients' written consent to a joint retainer, failing to provide legal services to the standard of a competent lawyer and misstating fact and law in a wrongful suit against her client and acting in a conflict of interest by preferring her own interest over the interest of her client. Her licence is suspended for six months, practice restrictions are placed on her licence after that, she is ordered to complete additional CPD hours, and she is ordered to refund fees to affected clients, failing which she will be suspended indefinitely. She is also ordered to pay $35,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Davies Bagambiire, Lawyer (Toronto)
The proceeding is converted to an Invitation to Attend, and the application is dismissed.
Adam Tynne Joseph Castonguay, Lawyer (Sudbury)
The panel varied the restrictions placed on Mr. Castonguay's licence.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Darren Deenosan Kirupa, Lawyer (Ajax)
Mr. Kirupa had been suspended on an interlocutory basis since October 2020. The panel found that he had disbursed funds from trust before issuing client invoices, withdrew money from trust to pay for transactions unrelated to his law practice, failed to maintain sufficient trust account balances and misappropriated HST held in trust as well as money received as litigation loans, failed to act honourably and with integrity, and failed to properly maintain books and records. The panel applied the presumptive penalty of revocation due to the proven misappropriation, and so Mr. Kirupa's licence was revoked and he was ordered to pay $22,730.50 in costs to the Law Society.
- 16/02/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
David Hao, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on February 13, 2024.
Kerlan Garfield McLean, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 12, 2024.
Olena Manoilo, Paralegal Applicant (Jasper, AB)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on February 9, 2024.
Antonio Franco De Bartolo, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 8, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Michael Israel Rappaport, Lawyer (Ottawa)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on February 20, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Marilou Nejal, Lawyer (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 20, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
John Calvin Edwin Barry, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 21, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on February 23, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
No new orders were posted this week.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Sam Haghparast Rad, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
The Tribunal previously dismissed the appeal of a decision finding that Mr. Rad did not establish that he was presently of good character and rejected his motion to admit fresh evidence. The Law Society requested costs of $14,000, while Mr. Rad argued that no costs should be awarded, or only $2,000. The panel rejected Mr. Rad's argument that his appeal raised issues of general importance, and found he did not provide evidence regarding his claimed inability to pay costs. The requested amount of costs was found to be reasonable and within the range awarded in similar cases, but the panel provided a moderate reduction because the appeal had a reasonable chance of success and the issues were not complex. Costs of $12,000 were ordered to be paid by Mr. Rad to the Law Society.
Nnamdi Sunny-Venn Vincent, Lawyer (Toronto)
Having previously found that Mr. Vincent engaged in professional misconduct, the panel considered the issue of costs. Mr. Vincent had signed an agreed statement facts only shortly before the hearing was to begin. Although the panel preferred Mr. Vincent's position on penalty, the Law Society’s position was not unreasonable. He was therefore ordered to pay costs of $6,000 over three years.
Giuseppe Jr. Campisi, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Peter Ian Murray, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Campisi and Mr. Murray brought a contested motion for several forms of relief. The request for production was granted in one respect: a third party was ordered to produce certain documents, which the panel then reviewed. The purpose was to balance Mr. Campisi's and Mr. Murray's right to defend the conduct allegations against the privacy interests relating to the third-party records. The panel ordered certain of those documents to be provided to the parties.
Timothy Kent Mobberley, Paralegal (London)
Having earlier found that Mr. Mobberley was knowingly reckless when he affirmed an affidavit that contained false and misleading information and filed it with the court, the panel considered penalty and costs. The panel rejected the Law Society’s submission that any act of dishonesty triggers presumptive revocation. The panel also rejected Mr. Mobberley's submission that a reprimand was appropriate. The panel found Mr. Mobberley was knowingly reckless, and his actions had consequences on the public. The panel also found multiple mitigating factors and was satisfied that a 30-day suspension was reasonable and appropriate. Mr. Mobberley was also ordered to pay $10,000 in costs over four years.
Rabah Yaacoub Moubarak, Lawyer (Vaughan)
Mr. Moubarak brought a motion seeking disclosure of communications between him and one of the complainants, between the two complainants, and between the two complainants and the Law Society. The panel did not accept his explanation for his inability to retrieve the records or seek them from one of the complainants. The panel accepted the complainant’s representations to the investigator that she no longer had these communications. The panel declined to order disclosure of communications between the two complainants and the Law Society because they had already been produced. The panel declined to order disclosure of communications between the two complainants because it was premature to do so, as these communications were relevant to the re-hearing on the merits, which would occur only if the agreed statement of facts was set aside: an issue that had yet to be determined. The motion for disclosure was dismissed with costs reserved to the panel hearing the motion to set aside the ASF.
Carrie Alexandra Fiorillo, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Fiorillo did not attend the hearing, at which the panel found that the Law Society had proven incapacity and a draft order was provided. After the hearing, Ms. Fiorillo advised that she had been unable to attend because of health reasons. A case management conference was scheduled, which Ms. Fiorillo did not attend. A hearing was scheduled to address whether the panel’s mandate was concluded (functus officio); Ms. Fiorillo did not attend. The panel heard submissions from the Law Society and determined that it was functus.
Ms. Fiorillo had a lengthy history of substance abuse. She was criminally convicted for impaired driving in 2018. In April 2019 she signed an undertaking that she would continue her treatment and therapy etc. Ms. Fiorillo visited incarcerated clients and appeared in court while intoxicated. She was non-compliant with her April 2019 undertaking. After the Law Society’s capacity investigation was opened, Ms. Fiorillo signed an undertaking not to practise law. The panel found the evidence clearly established that Ms. Fiorillo was incapable of meeting her obligations as a lawyer. Her licence was therefore suspended pending compliance with terms related to providing medical reports, as well as other conditions set out in the order.
Michael D. George Martosh, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
The parties entered an agreed statement of facts and joint submission on penalty. Mr. Martosh acknowledged that, in committing the criminal offences of possessing and accessing child pornography, he engaged in conduct unbecoming a licensee. The parties provided a joint submission for revocation of Mr. Martosh's licence and reduced costs of $3,000 to reflect Mr. Martosh's co-operation. The panel accepted the joint submission, as revocation was not contrary to the public interest given the seriousness of the misconduct, and since there was an efficient resolution of the case.
- 09/02/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Pawanjeet Singh Mann, Lawyer (Caledon Village)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 7, 2024.
Paul Edward Wilbert Shrum, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 6, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD ONLINE VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within an appeal by the licensee will be heard on February 13, 2024 at 1:30 p.m.
Danielle Shannon Harrison, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on February 14 & 16, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Richard Craig Anthony Patterson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 16, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Davies Bagambiire, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 16, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Richard Desmond Jackman, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Jackman engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Sam Haghparast Rad, Paralegal Applicant (Thornhill)
The panel orders that Mr. Rad will pay $12,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Nnamdi Sunny-Venn Vincent, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Vincent engaged in professional misconduct by failing to discharge all of his professional responsibilities honourably, with integrity, and in good faith, failing to respond with reasonable promptness to communications from the opposing lawyer, and failing to serve a client to the standard of a competent lawyer. A reprimand is ordered, along with $6,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Chi-Nam Chan, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Chan engaged in professional misconduct by failing to prepare trust reconciliations and comparisons for his special trust account, failing to maintain a duplicate cash receipts book, and failing to disburse trust account monies within a reasonable amount of time. His licence is suspended for one month, after which a variety of reporting terms are ordered, along with $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Courtney Akinwale Kazembe, Lawyer (North York)
Ms. Kazembe denied the allegations of harassing and discriminatory conduct or comment. The panel concluded that the Law Society had not met its burden to prove the allegations, and so the application was dismissed.
Omar Mohamoud Mohamed, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Mohamed took on file work from another paralegal who was suspended. The suspended paralegal took fees and kept the files instead of transferring them to Mr. Mohamed. Mr. Mohamed provided a compliance report to the Law Society regarding the suspended paralegal that was not accurate. The panel found that this was through inadvertence and lack of due diligence, not a deliberate attempt to mislead. Mr. Mohamed admitted the conduct, had no discipline record and clients were not adversely impacted. As a result the panel found that a reprimand was sufficient to accomplish specific deterrence and rehabilitation. The panel further ordered additional professional development hours and costs of $2,800.
Andrew Gordon Rogerson, Lawyer (Barrie)
The panel, having earlier found that Mr. Rogerson engaged in sexual harassment and discriminatory conduct towards female employees and sent correspondence that was abusive, offensive and otherwise inconsistent with the proper tone of professional communication from a lawyer, considered the parties’ submissions on penalty and costs. The communications were sent many years ago to two vulnerable clients. An employee left her employment as a result of Mr. Rogerson's conduct. The panel also considered the lack of a disciplinary history as well as the evidence from a clinical psychologist and Mr. Rogerson's expressed remorse and concluded that a one-month suspension was appropriate. The panel ordered Mr. Rogerson's one-month suspension to start March 4, 2024 and $5,000 in costs payable to the Law Society.
Dunstan Dan Senjule, Lawyer Applicant (Beaverton)
The Tribunal had previously dismissed the appeal of a decision dismissing Mr. Senjule's licensing application, and had invited costs submissions. The Law Society requested costs of $6,500 and Mr. Senjule did not deliver responding submissions. The requested amount of costs was found to be reasonable and within the range awarded in similar cases, therefore, costs of $6,500 were ordered to be paid by Mr. Senjule to the Law Society.
- 02/02/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Menelik Getachew Tessema, Lawyer (Maple)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 1, 2024.
Morris Goldstein, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 26, 2024.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on January 25, 2024.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (York)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on January 25, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD ONLINE, VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Richard Desmond Jackman, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 7, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Alec McLeod McLennan, Lawyer (Oakville)
A motion within an appeal by the licensee will be heard on February 7, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Chantel Dorothy Twizell, Paralegal (New Lowell)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 7, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Danielle Shannon Harrison, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction will be re-heard, at the direction of the appeal panel, on February 8 & 9, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Andrew Gordon Rogerson, Lawyer (Barrie)
Mr. Rogerson engaged in professional misconduct by engaging in sexual harassment and/or discrimination towards female employees and sending abusive or offensive correspondence to two clients and one client's father. His licence is suspended for one month, and he is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Courtney Akinwale Kazembe, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Kazembe did not engage in professional misconduct. The application is dismissed.
Dunstan Dan Senjule, Lawyer Applicant (Beaverton)
The panel orders that Mr. Senjule will pay $6,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Michael D. George Martosh, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Martosh engaged in conduct unbecoming a licensee by possessing and accessing child pornography. His licence is revoked and he is ordered to pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Danielle Shannon Harrison, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Ms. Harrison appealed a decision to order an interlocutory suspension in the context of serious allegations of professional misconduct, including participating in or facilitating a predatory mortgage loan scheme involving vulnerable senior citizens. The majority of the panel found that the Hearing Division had failed to ensure procedural fairness by refusing to allow one of Ms. Harrison's witnesses to testify and limiting cross-examination without considering the specific context and relevant factors. A minority of the panel also found that the Hearing Division erred in failing to demonstrate in its reasons that it had considered contradictory evidence. The appeal was allowed and the hearing panel order was set aside with a later effective date. The parties were asked to contact the Tribunal to discuss proposed timelines for costs requests, if any.
- 19/01/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Rumdeep Dhillon, Lawyer (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 18, 2024.
Paul Mazzeo, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 14, 2024.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on January 12, 2024.
Toomas Ounapuu, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 12, 2024.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Michael D. George Martosh, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A conduct hearing will be held on January 26, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Matthew William O’Neil, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. O'Neil engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating more than $20,000 from the law firm at which he was an associate and by failing to carry out the practice of law, discharge all responsibilities with honour and integrity, and serve his clients to the standard of a competent lawyer. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $34,000 in costs to the Law Society.
William Francis Fehrenbach, Lawyer (Kitchener)
Mr. Fehrenbach engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. A reprimand has been ordered.
Darren Deenosan Kirupa, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Kirupa engaged in professional misconduct by disbursing earned fees before issuing a client invoice, withdrawing money from trust to pay third parties, credit cards, and cash withdrawals for transactions unrelated to his law practice, collecting HST from his clients and then failing to remit it to the Canada Revenue Agency and instead using it for his own purposes, collecting money from litigation loan companies and using it for a purpose other than what it had been loaned for, and failing to maintain books and records. His licence is revoked, and he is orderd to pay $22,730.50 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Ghazal Qureshi, Paralegal (Toronto)
Ms. Qureshi admitted that she never deposited her client’s funds into a trust account; nor did she provide him with a bill prior to withdrawing the funds. She also failed to do the work for which she was retained. The parties jointly submitted that revocation was the appropriate penalty. The panel accepted that nothing warranted interfering with the joint submission on penalty or on costs. Ms. Qureshi's licence was revoked and she was ordered to pay $2,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Vahe Avagyan, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel found that Mr. Avagyan engaged in professional misconduct for failing to respond to the Law Society. He did not attend the hearing, but the panel found that he had been given notice, and proceeded in his absence. Given the nature of the misconduct and Mr. Avagyan's regulatory history, the panel ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance, with outstanding requests for information followed by a two-month suspension, a conditional fine and costs of $4,000.
Emile Carrington, Lawyer (Chatham)
Mr. Carrington is a former judge who requested approval to appear as counsel in various courts in Ontario. A retired judge must establish that exceptional circumstances exist for the Hearing Division to grant approval to appear as counsel. The panel found that exceptional circumstances were established, including the very short time that Mr. Carrington served as a judge, his identity as a Black lawyer and contributions to the community and justice system, his agreement to restrictions on appearing in courts where he served, and the support of the application by the Law Society. Mr. Carrington's request to appear as counsel was approved with certain restrictions.
- 12/01/2024
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Sujata Sharan, Lawyer (Burlington)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on January 11, 2024.
John Jules David Somjen, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 10, 2024.
Ganesh Balaganthan, Lawyer (Markham)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 8, 2024.
Ferduse Bari, Paralegal (Oshawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on December 27, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Matthew William O’Neil, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on January 15, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Richard Craig Anthony Patterson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held from January 15-18, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Ruth-Anne Dawn Avruskin, Lawyer (Orangeville)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on January 19, 2024 at 1:00 p.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Eric Paul Polten, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Polten engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Nicholas Folorunsho Owodunni, Lawyer (Tottenham)
Mr. Owodunni failed to serve his client to the standard of a competent lawyer and failed to hold his client's psychological report in confidence. His licence is suspended for two months, and after that until he has complied with the Plan of Supervision. He is also ordered to complete several continuing education courses, and to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Carrie Alexandra Fiorillo, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Fiorillo has been and continues to be incapacitated. She is suspended until she has compied with a variety of treatment, employment, and reporting terms.
Robyrt Hawryden Regan, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Regan engaged in professional misconduct in multiple instances, including by hiding assets from creditors, appropriating his former client’s business, breaching solicitor-client privilege, abusive and offensive professional communications, acting in conflict, and incorporating a company to appropriate the business name of an employer, among others. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $150,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Deborah Ann Williams, Paralegal Applicant (Whitby)
Ms. Williams submitted that her lack of training worked as an unfairness during the hearing. The panel did not accept the Law Society’s characterization of Ms. Williams, finding that she did not lengthen the process. However, she was unsuccessful, and the panel noted that the professions as a whole should not bear the costs of unsuccessful licensing applications. Ms. Williams was therefore ordered to pay costs of $3,000 to the Law Society.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel earlier found that Mr. Regan engaged in multiple incidents of professional misconduct, including hiding assets from creditors, appropriating his former client’s business, breaching solicitor-client privilege, abusive and offensive professional communications, acting in conflict, and incorporating a company to appropriate the business name of an employer. The panel found that revocation of Mr. Regan's licence was an appropriate penalty, given the seriousness of the misconduct, its duration and impact as well as his lack of remorse, his prior disciplinary record and insufficient evidence regarding his mental health. Costs of $150,000 to be paid in three installments were ordered in consideration of the lengthy hearing, which was exacerbated by Mr. Regan's attempts to relitigate issues.
David Stephen Strashin, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Strashin admitted allegations including failure to serve his clients, failure to fulfil terms of his undertaking, mishandling trust funds and failure to refund fees as required. At the date of the hearing, Mr. Strashin had repaid the retainers owed except to Client A, and advised that Client A would be repaid immediately following the hearing. The parties' joint submission for 90-day suspension and costs of $7,500 was accepted as reasonable.
Sam Haghparast Rad, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Rad appealed a decision that he had not established that he was presently of good character, which was based on findings related to previous criminal convictions and other conduct. He brought a motion to introduce fresh evidence relating to his CV, which had been found by the hearing panel to be inconsistent with other evidence. The fresh evidence was not admitted, as it was found to be insufficiently credible and would not have reasonably been expected to affect the result. The appeal panel found that the hearing panel did fail to provide procedural fairness regarding its finding about Mr. Rad's CV, as it did not provide the appellant with an opportunity to respond to its concerns, but it was found that this was not fatal to the hearing panel’s decision, as there was otherwise ample evidence to support its findings regarding Mr. Rad's character. The appeal panel found that the hearing panel also did not err in its assessment of the revocation of Mr. Rad's parole, his pardon or the totality of the evidence. The appeal was therefore dismissed, and the parties invited to make submissions on costs.
Richard Keith Watson, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel concluded that Mr. Watson had satisfied the relatively low bar of a serious issue to be tried. The panel did not accept the Law Society’s submission that loss of income and right to practise do not amount to irreparable harm. The panel noted that Mr. Watson would not be able to recover damages for lost income should his appeal be successful. The panel concluded that Mr. Watson did not demonstrate that the balance of convenience favours a stay. The motion for a stay pending appeal was dismissed with costs reserved to the panel hearing the appeal.
Cheryl Lisa MacKinnon, Paralegal (Wahnapitae)
Ms. MacKinnon admitted the facts and acknowledged that they constituted professional misconduct. The panel found that the misconduct showed a concerning dishonesty and lack of integrity; Ms. MacKinnon falsified documents, failed to properly advise her clients, and failed to get appropriate instructions. The parties agreed that the extent and duration of the misconduct, as well as its seriousness, supported the penalty of revocation.
The panel directed the parties to provide written submissions on the appropriateness of the joint submission on costs and the issue of restitution. The panel was concerned about the lack of transparency on these issues. The parties submitted that they had considered the relevant factors and jurisprudence and applied them in agreeing to the costs to be awarded to the Law Society. The parties relied on the Tribunal’s jurisprudence that joint submissions ought to be adopted unless they bring the administration of justice into disrepute. The panel ordered Ms. MacKinnon's licence to be revoked immediately, costs of $6,000 to the Law Society and for her to reimburse the Compensation Fund for any moneys disbursed to her former clients.
- 21/12/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Ann-Marie Rampersad, Paralegal (Pickering)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on December 11, 2023.
Timothy Kent Mobberley, Paralegal (London)
A notice of appeal from the Law Society was filed on December 12, 2023.
Sang-Kyun Suh, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of appeal from the Law Society was filed on December 19, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Carrie Alexandra Fiorillo, Lawyer (Toronto)
A capacity hearing will be held on January 4, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Nicholas Folorunsho Owodunni, Lawyer (Tottenham)
A conduct hearing will be held on January 4, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Omar Mohamoud Mohamed, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Mohamed engaged in professional misconduct by failing to prevent the unauthorized provision of legal services by an unauthorized person and improperly worked with a suspended licensee. He also failed to discharge his responsibilities honourably and with integrity by submitting an untrue compliance report to the Law Society. Mr. Mohamed was reprimanded and shall complete ten additional hours of CPD relating to professionalism and practice management. He was ordered to pay $2,800 in costs to the Law Society.
Sujata Sharan, Lawyer (Burlington)
Ms. Sharan's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis.
Emile Aubrey Carrington, Lawyer (Chatham)
The panel found that exceptional circumstances exist to permit Mr. Carrington, a retired judge, to appear as counsel. Mr. Carrington is restricted from appearing as counsel at the Superior Court of Justice and the Ontario Court of Justice at Woodstock and St. Thomas until May 2, 2025.
Cheryl Lisa MacKinnon, Paralegal (Wahnapitae)
Ms. MacKinnon failed to act with integrity in relation to multiple clients and failed to communicate with, respond to, or serve multiple clients. She abandoned her clients' legal rights, she failed to deliver or provide an account to multiple clients, and failed to deposit retainer fees into a trust account. She also failed to provide sufficient supervision or instructions to staff. Ms. MacKinnon's licence is revoked and she was ordered to pay $6,000 in costs to the Law Society. She was also ordered to reimburse the Compensation Fund for any money disbursed to her former clients.
Richard Keith Watson, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Watson’s motion for a stay pending appeal was dismissed.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Robson failed to treat an opposing party and her counsel with courtesy, civility and good faith. He also failed to discharge all his responsibilities to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice honourably and with integrity. Mr. Robson's licence to practise law is revoked.
Sam Haghparast Rad, Paralegal Applicant (Thornhill)
Mr. Rad’s appeal from the Hearing Division decision dismissing his application for a paralegal licence is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
After finding earlier that Mr. Hutton was and remains incapacitated, the hearing resumed to hear submissions on whether a suspension was required. The panel declined to dictate what medical approach the treating physician must undertake. The panel also declined to impose practice restrictions at this time, noting that to do so would be speculative. Mr. Hutton’s licence was suspended immediately and will continue indefinitely until certain conditions are met. The panel also ordered Mr. Hutton to follow a treatment plan for five years following the termination of the suspension. The parties were ordered to return to the Tribunal to finalise any practice restrictions to be imposed on his return to practice. Mr. Hutton was ordered to pay $15,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Nnamdi Sunny-Venn Vincent, Lawyer (Toronto)
The parties presented an agreed statement of facts and Mr. Vincent admitted the allegations of failure to serve his client; failure to appear at court; failure to respond to communications from another lawyer and failure to fully comply with an order to pay costs personally. Although the misconduct was serious, the panel found that a reprimand was appropriate given the fact that he had already been sanctioned with a personal costs award for the misconduct and other mitigating factors. Mr. Vincent was reprimanded.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Barnwell's motion for a stay pending appeal is granted. The panel ordered the appeal to be expedited.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society sought its costs of Mr. Khan’s unsuccessful appeal of a decision to revoke his licence. Mr. Khan argued that no costs should be payable on the basis of financial hardship. The panel found that there was no evidence of financial hardship provided; that Mr. Khan had increased costs by the manner in which he presented his appeal; and that the requested costs amount was not unprecedented. The panel ordered costs of $30,000 payable over a period of two years.
Courtney Akinwale Kazembe, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Kazembe acknowledged that he had engaged in professional misconduct, including, amongst other allegations, acting in a conflict of interest, failing to provide competent legal services, and failing to act with honour and integrity in the context of a syndicated mortgage and other real estate transactions. The panel accepted a joint submission that provided for a penalty of permission to surrender with no award of costs based on the public interest test. The panel also accepted the joint submission that he not be permitted to re-apply for a licence until he repaid all legal fees charged to his lender clients on the syndicated mortgage, as it determined that such reimbursement is not uncommon and advances penalty goals.
- 08/12/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Shahid Malik, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on December 6, 2023.
Serdar Kalaycioglu, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on December 4, 2023.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Claxton Bay)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on December 1, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Sujata Sharan, Lawyer (Burlington)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on December 11, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Nathan William Currie, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held on December 11, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Darren Deenosan Kirupa, Lawyer (Ajax)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 12, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Gary John McCallum, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 12, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Emile Carrington, Lawyer (Chatham)
A retired judge appearing as counsel hearing will be held on December 13, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Carrie Alexandra Fiorillo, Lawyer (Toronto)
A capacity hearing will be held on December 14, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Vahe Avagyan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on December 15, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Hutton is and has been incapacitated. He is suspended until he has engaged in treatment. Following that, a variety of terms will be placed on his licence. He is also ordered to pay $15,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Khan will pay $30,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Robert Bruce Gordon Stewart, Lawyer (Collingwood)
Following a 2019 capacity order, Mr. Stewart was suspended after a positive drug test. He was also suspended on an interlocutory basis in 2021. An adjournment request was granted, however Mr. Stewart did not appear on the rescheduled dates. The hearing proceeded in his absence.
The panel found that Mr. Stewart was never at any time in full compliance with the terms of the 2019 capacity order. The panel found that he practised law contrary to the terms of the order and failed to act with integrity by making repeated false and misleading representations to the Law Society regarding his compliance. Mr. Stewart met with multiple clients as well as with Crown Counsel and opposing counsel while suspended. He appeared as counsel before the courts while suspended. The panel also found that he knowingly gave untrue information to his client about their action, including fabricating court documents. The panel concluded that the misconduct engaged in was repeated and serious. There was no evidence to mitigate this. The panel found Mr. Stewart to be ungovernable and revoked his licence. He was ordered to pay $140,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Franklyn Scott Taylor, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Taylor had previously been found to have failed to serve a number of clients, failed to respond to communications from another lawyer, failed to give notice to LawPRO regarding a civil claim, and failed to co-operate with the Law Society with respect to several investigations. A penalty hearing was convened. He did not participate in the hearing. The panel considered his lengthy discipline history, which involved progressive discipline and a number of previous findings of professional misconduct, and determined that Mr. Taylor was ungovernable and ordered revocation of his licence. Limited medical evidence did not establish a relationship between Mr. Taylor's health issues and the misconduct. Requested costs of $25,000 were found to be within an appropriate range and were ordered.
Vahe Avagyan, Lawyer (Toronto)
The penalty hearing was scheduled in consultation with Mr. Avagyan, who did not attend. The hearing proceeded in his absence. The panel ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance, followed by a one-month suspension and a spot audit within six months of Mr. Avagyan's return to practice. He was also ordered to pay $8,581.50 in costs.
Lorne Howard Albaum, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Albaum was found to have engaged in professional misconduct by using his trust account for two clients for purposes not related to the provision of legal services and for failing to verify the identity of a client. The panel found that there was no evidence that the use of the trust account was dishonest. The Rules of Professional Conduct were breached regardless of whether the use was dishonest or not. The nature, extent and duration of Mr. Albaum's misconduct was significant. The panel ordered his licence be suspended for nine months and he participate in a spot audit. The parties were given timelines for making cost submissions.
Vanessa-Lee Routley, Lawyer (Winnipeg, MB)
Ms. Routley admitted the conduct, and that the conduct was professional misconduct. After considering the Aguirre factors, the panel concluded that the proposed one-month suspension was appropriate. Ms. Routley was also ordered to pay costs of $3,275 to the Law Society.
Petar Lulic, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society alleged that Mr. Lulic had failed to respond to its requests for information. He had notice of the hearing and the panel proceeded in his absence. The panel found that professional misconduct as alleged was proven. In 2022, Mr. Lulic had previously been suspended for one month and then indefinitely pending compliance for failure to provide information requested by the Law Society. Based on principles of progressive discipline, the panel ordered an indefinite suspension pending a complete response to the Law Society to be followed by a two-month suspension. The Law Society’s costs request of $4,780.50 was found to be reasonable and a conditional fine of $2,000 was also ordered.
Richard Keith Watson, Lawyer (Toronto)
After reviewing the parties’ submissions and the Aguirre factors, the panel ordered that Mr. Watson be suspended indefinitely pending compliance, followed by a one-month suspension. The Law Society’s request for a conditional fine was denied, and Mr. Watson was ordered to pay $15,000 in costs.
Dunstan Dan Senjule, Lawyer Applicant (Beaverton)
Mr. Senjule applied to be re-licensed as a lawyer. His licence had been revoked in 2010 after a panel found that he had engaged in several serious forms of professional misconduct. The Hearing Division dismissed the application because it found that Mr. Senjule had not established that he was currently of good character. Mr. Senjule appealed this decision. The Appeal Division found no palpable and overriding errors in the Hearing Division’s assessment of evidence and findings relating to remorse, rehabilitation and credibility The appeal was dismissed and timelines set out for submissions on costs.
- 01/12/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
David Robert Gorman, Lawyer (Swastika)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 29, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Andrew Gordon Rogerson, Lawyer (Barrie)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 4, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Omar Mohamoud Mohamed, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 6, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on December 7, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Robert Bruce Gordon Stewart, Lawyer (Collingwood/Bath)
The panel orders that Mr. Stewart will pay $140,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Lorne Howard Albaum, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Albaum engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a licensee by using his trust account for purposes not related to the provision of legal services, and for failing to verify the identity of a client. His licence is suspended for nine months, and he is ordered to participate in a spot audit.
Suzanne Elizabeth Deliscar, Lawyer (Orangeville)
Ms. Deliscar engaged in professional misconduct by failing to file a Compliance Report and by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. Her licence is revoked, and she is ordered to pay $13,004 in costs to the Law Society.
Danielle Shannon Harrison, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Harrison's appeal is allowed. The order of the hearing panel is set aside on grounds of denial of procedural fairness and natural justice.
Dunstan Dan Senjule, Lawyer Applicant (Beaverton)
Mr. Senjule's appeal is dismissed.
Richard Keith Watson, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Watson will pay $15,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Peel)
The Law Society sought its costs of Ms. Deokaran's unsuccessful appeal of a decision to impose an interlocutory suspension. Ms. Deokaran argued that no costs should be payable. The panel found that the appeal was relatively complex; that Ms. Deokaran repeatedly filed incomplete transcripts, causing additional work for the Law Society; that she did not provide evidence of financial hardship; and that the requested amount was in the expected range. The panel ordered costs of $20,000 payable over two years.
Ronauld Gordon Walton, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel found that Mr. Walton's conduct outside the practice of law in regards to two groups of investment / mortgage transactions demonstrated a lack of integrity. Judicial findings regarding the first group of transactions were admitted into evidence following an earlier CUPE motion decision. The judicial findings included granting judgment against Mr. Walton and his wife for engaging in fraud while acting in a fiduciary relationship.
In the second group of allegations, the panel found that Mr. Walton and his wife wrongly entered into mortgage agreements. Mr. Walton misrepresented to the lender that he and his wife were the 50/50 owners of the shares of the companies when they were not. The panel found that Mr. Walton knowingly signed documents which contained false representations. Mr. Walton's licence was revoked and he was ordered to pay $13,809 in costs to the Law Society.
Sang-Kyun Suh, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel found Mr. Suh's misconduct was offensive and serious. It considered that any aggravating and mitigating factors together had no significant impact on the scale of penalty and ordered a three-month suspension of his licence.
The parties disagreed on costs. The panel made findings in favour of some allegations and dismissed other allegations. The panel concluded that the proceedings in respect of some of the allegations were unwarranted, and there was no reasonable prospect that the Law Society would succeed. The panel held that Mr. Suh was entitled to 40% of his costs, which were set off against the award of $25,000 in favour of the Law Society. Mr. Suh was suspended for three months and ordered to pay costs of $6,000 to the Law Society.
- 24/11/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Gerrit Wolbertus Verbeek, Lawyer (TImmins)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 23, 2023.
Charles Michael Cooke, Lawyer (Thornhill)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 22, 2023.
Thuy-Diem Trinh, Lawyer (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 16, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Brian Anderson Callender, Lawyer (Kingston)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 27, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Suzanne Elizabeth Deliscar, Lawyer (Brampton)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 28, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 28, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Donna Nicole Wilson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on December 1, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Petar Lulic, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Lulic engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for two months after that, he is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine if he has not co-operated by February 17, 2024, and he is ordered to pay $4,780.50 in costs to the Law Society.
David Stephen Strashin, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Strashin engaged in professional misconduct by, on multiple occasions, failing to perform services to the standard of a competent lawyer, including by failing to take necessary steps and identify issues. failing to promptlly fulfill the terms of his undertaking, and by, on numerous occasions, failing to deposit and account for funds as required by By-Law 9. His licence is suspended for 90 days, and he is ordered to pay $7,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Sang-Kyun Suh, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Suh engaged in professional misconduct by committing sexual harassment and failing to act with courtesy and civility. His licence is suspended for three months, and he is ordered to pay $6,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Peel)
The panel orders that Ms. Deokaran will pay $20,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Myles Frederick McLellan, Lawyer Applicant (Sault Ste. Marie)
The panel had denied the Mr. McLellan's re-licensing application on the basis that he was not presently of good character, and the Law Society sought $30,000 costs. The panel concluded that this would be punitive as it would cause hardship to Mr. McLellan, but that a lower cost award of $11,000 payable over one year would be reasonable. The panel therefore ordered Mr. McLellan to pay $11,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Mehrdad Pashangpour, Paralegal (Newmarket)
The panel found that Mr. Pashangpour had been served with notice and materials and the hearing proceeded in his absence. He did not respond to the request to admit.
Mr. Pashangpour did not indicate that he was a paralegal on his advertising. He had represented himself as a lawyer; he had also offered and provided legal services to clients while his licence was in a non-practising status. He had provided immigration services, which were outside the scope of his licence. Mr. Pashangpour did not deposit retainers into a trust account, and failed to complete the work for which he was retained. Mr. Pashangpour encouraged two clients to engage in fraud and illegal conduct, thereby failing to act with integrity and honour. The panel revoked Mr. Pashangpour's licence and ordered him to refund retainer fees to five clients. He was also ordered to pay $70,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Peter John Craniotis, Lawyer (Oakville)
Numerous issues with Mr. Craniotis' trust account and records were found during a spot audit. While there was admission of misconduct, the parties did not agree on penalty and costs. The panel considered that Mr. Craniotis had no related prior discipline and that he had accepted responsibility; he admitted the facts and co-operated with the spot audit and investigation. The panel concluded that the scope and duration of the misconduct warranted a suspension, though for one month instead of the three months sought by the Law Society. Mr. Craniotis was therefore suspended for one month and ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Steven Russell Michael, Lawyer (Kitchener)
Based on an agreed statement of facts, the panel found that professional misconduct related to allegations including failure to fulfill undertakings related to mortgages and failure to co-operate with the Law Society’s investigation was established. A joint submission for a four-month suspension and costs of $3,000 fine were accepted, taking into account Mr. Michael's lack of discipline history, nature and extent of the misconduct and extenuation circumstances.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (York)
Mr. Robson brought a motion alleging that disclosure was provided in a disorganized and chaotic fashion such that he is unable to understand the case he must meet. The panel found that he had been provided with accessible and meaningful disclosure and the motion was dismissed. A schedule was set for receiving cost submissions.
Winfield Edward Corcoran, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Corcoran objected to the Law Society’s proposed expert witness. The panel held that it had the authority to make a pre-hearing decision as to admissibility and that the panel should exercise that authority. Where the expert provides opinions on conclusions that were made by the trial judge and which Mr. Corcoran cannot relitigate, the motion panel held that those opinions were inadmissible. The opinions on the remaining questions were left to be determined by the merits panel. The hearing was adjourned and costs of the admissibility motion were reserved to the merits panel.
Alexandre Papouchine, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Papouchine appealed a decision of the Hearing Division which held that he should not be licensed as a paralegal. Transcripts are required as part of the appeal process, but Mr. Papouchine requested that this requirement be relaxed or that someone else should fund the transcripts, as he could not afford to pay for them as a person with a disability. He argued that the requirement for transcripts discriminated against him as a person with a disability under the Human Rights Code. The Tribunal found that although transcripts would be required for his appeal and accepted he would unlikely be able to pay for them, the appeal had no reasonable prospect of success, so it would not grant his request. Further, he did not establish a prima facie case of discrimination which would require accommodation under the Human Rights Code or that the Tribunal should order its court reporting service to provide a recording that could be used to independently transcribe the proceedings
- 17/11/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Ruth-Anne Dawn Avruskin, Lawyer (Orangeville)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 16, 2023.
Murray Neil Maltz, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 16, 2023.
Girolamo Falletta, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A notice of motion to vary or cancel an interlocutory order was filed on November 10, 2023.
Chi-Nam Steve Chan, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 10, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held from November 20-24, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Danielle Shannon Harrison, Lawyer (Mississauga)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on November 20, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
David Stephen Strashin, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings (21H-127 & 22H-005) will be held on November 21, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Adam Tynne Joseph Castonguay, Lawyer (Sudbury)
A motion to vary or cancel an interlocutory order will be heard on November 23, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. and on November 24, 2023 at 1:00 p.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Myles Frederick McLellan, Lawyer Applicant (Sault Ste. Marie)
The panel orders that Mr. McLellan will pay $11,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Osborne Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Barnwell's motion for a stay pending appeal is granted.
Timothy Kent Mobberley, Paralegal (London)
Mr. Mobberley engaged in professional misconduct by having an individual's bank account garnished, having sworn/affirmed an affidavit that contained false or misleading information. His licence is suspended for thirty days, and he is ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
John Calvin Edwin Barry, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel found that Mr. Barry failed to communicate essential information to his clients and failed to properly discharge his responsibility for appealing a client’s careless driving conviction. Mr. Barry also failed to fully advise a client of the consequences of acting for two clients charged together and failed to recommend the client obtain independent legal advice or obtain written consent to the joint retainer. The panel found that Mr. Barry failed to serve a client to the standard of a competent lawyer and failed to be candid with the client. A hearing will be scheduled to address penalty.
James Douglas Skinner, Lawyer (London)
Based on an agreed statement of facts, Mr. Skinner was found to have engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a licensee by misappropriating trust funds, as well as engaging in conduct unbecoming a licensee in his capacity as an estate trustee. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission that Mr. Skinner's licence be revoked, and awarded costs of $2,000, in light of Mr. Skinner's co-operation in the proceeding.
Michael Israel Rappaport, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Rappaport was found to have engaged in professional misconduct. The Tribunal ordered that his licence be suspended for five months and that he pay costs of $55,000. He appealed these decisions and requested a stay of the order of the Hearing Division pending his appeal. The panel found that there was a serious issue to be determined on appeal, that Mr. Rappaport would suffer irreparable harm if the stay was not granted, and that the balance of convenience favoured a stay, as a lengthy stay would not be necessary if the appeal was expedited and public confidence would not be impaired by a delayed start to the five-month suspension, as long as the appeal was promptly heard. The Tribunal ordered a stay pending the appeal and deadlines for the perfection of Mr. Rappaport's appeal. If these deadlines were not met, the stay would be lifted.
- 10/11/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Osborne Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of appeal was filed on November 2, 2023.
David Marcovitch, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 2, 2023.Abba Emmanuel Chima, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 4, 2023.Priashna Singh, Lawyer (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 3, 2023.Deborah Ann Williams, Paralegal Applicant (Whitby)
A notice of appeal was filed on November 6, 2023.Eric Paul Polten, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 6, 2023.Adam Estabrooks, Paralegal Applicant (Timmins)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on November 7, 2023.Giovanni Colavita, Lawyer (Concord)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 8, 2023.Lior Samfiru, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 8, 2023.Sheriza Mohammed-Ali, Lawyer (Etobicoke)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 9, 2023.UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Nnamdi Sunny-Venn Vincent, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 13 - 15, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Timothy Kent Mobberley, Paralegal (London)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 13, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion hearing in the appeal by the licensee will be heard on November 15, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Petar Lulic, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on November 17, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
No new orders were posted this week.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
The Paralegal Applicant succeeded in her appeal of a decision to find that she was not presently of good character and sought costs both of the appeal and the initial hearing. The panel did not order costs in connection to the appeal, as it found that the Law Society did not act unreasonably, and it was important that the appeal be fully argued. Ms. Singh’s claim for costs in relation to the Law Society’s conduct at the first hearing should be determined by the new hearing panel determining her licensing application.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel earlier found that Mr. Barnwell had engaged in professional misconduct by failing to know he was being used to facilitate dishonesty, knowingly assisting in a dishonest transaction, and withdrawing from trust more money than he held for that client. The panel relied on contemporaneous e-mails and documents rather than Mr. Barnwell’s oral evidence, finding that his recollection was probably inaccurate and the risk of similar wilful blindness is high.
The panel concluded that Mr. Barnwell’s misconduct was among the most serious a lawyer can engage in: he broke the promises he made to others and breached their trust. He also breached the trust of those whose money he held in trust. Mr. Barnwell had brought sufficient evidence to grant him permission to surrender his licence instead of having his licence revoked.
Joyann Vallane Oliver, Paralegal (Toronto)
Ms. Oliver did not oppose the allegations of misconduct relating to her paralegal firm, which included acting outside the scope of paralegal practice, improper fee-splitting and referral fee arrangements and misleading marketing. A six-month suspension was ordered to reflect the seriousness of the misconduct, plus an ongoing suspension until the Paralegal complied with books and record requirements. Costs of $10,000 were ordered.
Ngozi Akunna Oti, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Oti did not appear at the hearing and she did not participate in an accommodation process during the Law Society investigation. Ms. Oti did not co-operate with the Law Society investigation. Her licence is suspended indefinitely until she provides a complete response to the Law Society's request and attends an interview, and then for two months. Costs of $7,200 were ordered.
Kevin Raymond Hodge, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Mr. Hodge admitted that his conduct constituted professional misconduct and the panel accepted the parties’ joint submission of an indefinite suspension pending compliance with investigative requests, followed by a one-month suspension. He was also ordered to pay $4,216 in costs to the Law Society.
- 03/11/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Vahe Avagyan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 31, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Giuseppe Jr. Campisi, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Peter Ian Murray, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings will be held from November 6-9, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Adam Tynne Joseph Castonguay, Lawyer (Sudbury)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on November 10, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Sam Haghparast Rad, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
An appeal by the licence applicant will be heard on November 10, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Barnwell engaged in professional misconduct by failing to know he was being used to facilitate dishonesty, knowingly assisting in a dishonest transaction, and withdrawing from trust more money than he held for that client. He is granted permission to surrender his licence. The parties are invited to send written submissions on costs.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
The panel orders that Ms. Singh will pay no costs.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Charlene Dorothy Desrochers, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Ms. Desrochers' licence has been suspended on an interim interlocutory basis since August 2018. The panel found that there were reasonable grounds to believe there might be a health issue affecting her ability to meet her obligations as a licensee. The medical evidence provided by Ms. Desrochers lacks specificity and substance. The panel acknowledged the inherently intrusive nature of a psychiatric assessment. The panel ordered the assessment to be done by the psychiatrist submitted by Ms. Desrochers as opposed to the psychiatrist submitted by the Law Society after considering Ms. Desrochers' submissions and those of her doctor.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Hearing Division had earlier found that Mr. Khan engaged in 30 separate particulars of professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming. It held that the presumptive penalty of revocation of Mr. Khan's licence should be imposed, and ordered $132,000 in costs.
Mr. Khan appealed these decisions as well as a decision of a motions panel of the Appeal Division. The panel found that the motions panel had jurisdiction to consider the Law Society’s motion on the deemed admissions, and that it committed no error when it made its order. It further examined the many other objections made by Mr. Khan to the various rulings and orders made in the proceedings and found no reviewable errors. The appeal was dismissed in its entirety. The Law Society was invited to provide written submissions if it sought costs of the appeal.
- 27/10/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Adam Christopher White, Lawyer (Keswick)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 26, 2023.
Emile Carrington, Lawyer (Chatham)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding a retired judge appearing as counsel was filed on October 26, 2023.
Gareth D'Costa, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding capacity was filed on October 26, 2023.
Peter Robert Nicholas Harrison, Lawyer (Owen Sound)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 25, 2023.
Silky Attri, Paralegal (Etobicoke)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 24, 2023.
Harneet Kaur, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 24, 2023.
David Barry Epstein, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on October 20, 2023.
Richard Keith Watson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on October 18, 2023.
Dariusz Wroblewski, Lawyer (Guelph)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 18, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Nahid Rahimi, Paralegal (North York)
Two conduct hearings (22H-102 & 21H-159 ) will be held from October 30-November 3, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Khan's appeal is dismissed.
Sujata Sharan, Lawyer (Burlington)
The motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction is adjourned. Ms. Sharan's licence is suspended on an interim interlocutory basis.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
There were no new reasons posted this week.
- 20/10/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Vivek Nijhawan, Lawyer Applicant (Ottawa)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on October 18, 2023.
Donna Nicole Wilson, Lawyer (Whitby)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 18, 2023.
Benjamin James Henry Delanghe, Lawyer (London)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 18, 2023.
Ranjit Singh Gill, Paralegal (Cambridge)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 17, 2023.
Shallu Mehrok, Paralegal (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 16, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Lorne Howard Albaum, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 24, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (York)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on October 25, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Winfield Edward Corcoran, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on October 25, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Sujata Sharan, Lawyer (Burlington)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on October 25, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Danielle Shannon Harrison, Lawyer (Mississauga)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on October 27, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Stephanie Nadia Colangelo, Paralegal Applicant (Port Colborne)
The Law Society's appeal is dismissed.
Vahe Avagyan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Avagyan engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a spot audit and by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that. He is ordered to participate in a spot audit, and ordered to pay $8,581.50 in costs to the Law Society.
Ghazal Qureshi, Paralegal (Toronto)
Ms. Quereshi engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating approximately $17,500, receiving approximately $17,500 from a client and failing to deposit it immediately into a trust account, and withdrawing trust funds for services that had not yet been rendered or billed for. Her licence is revoked and she is ordered to pay $2,500 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Aliamisse Omar Mundulai, Lawyer Applicant (Vaughan)
Mr. Mundulai's licensing application and appeal were unsuccessful. There was no merit to the issues raised on appeal. Mr. Mundulai provided no evidence regarding his ability to pay. The panel concluded that the costs sought were reasonable and proportionate. The panel did not interpret s. 49.26 and 49.35(2) of the Act as giving it jurisdiction to impose terms and conditions extending beyond the scope of the current proceeding. Mr. Mundulai was ordered to pay costs to the Law Society of $5,535.
Stephanie Nadia Colangelo, Paralegal Applicant (Port Colborne)
The Law Society appealed from the Hearing Division decision that the Ms. Colangelo is eligible to be granted a P1 licence. In 2018, she had pled guilty to child luring in relation to three students while she was employed as a high school teacher. Her teaching certificate was suspended in 2019 and revoked in October 2021. She disclosed this in her application for a P1 licence.
The appeal panel concluded that there was sufficient evidence to support the hearing panel’s finding that Ms. Colangelo is presently of good character. The appeal panel found that the Law Society did not identify any error in principle in the analysis or any palpable and overriding error in the findings, and so dismissed the appeal.
John Paul Corrent, Lawyer (Windsor)
Mr. Corrent admitted that his actions while estate trustee and solicitor for an estate constituted professional misconduct, including charging fees that were not fair or reasonable and failing to docket his time separately for legal services and estate administration services. The joint submission of a suspension of two months, practice restrictions for two years and reimbursement of his client was accepted by the panel as not contrary to the public interest. Mr. Corrent was also ordered to pay costs of $25,000.
Heath Peter Leyrow Whiteley, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A reporting service complained to the Law Society that Mr. Whiteley had not responded to any correspondence or paid outstanding invoices. The Law Society wrote and telephoned Mr. Whiteley but he did not respond, though he confirmed in January 2023 that the outstanding invoices had been paid. The panel accepted the joint submission of a reprimand and costs of $3,000 to be paid to the Law Society.
Giuseppe Jr. Campisi, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Peter Ian Murray, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Campisi and Mr. Murray brought a number of motions for production of documents in the context of a conduct proceeding involving their representation of clients in motor vehicle accident benefit claims. Some of the requests were withdrawn or resolved, leaving three requests for production to be determined by the panel. The panel found that two of the requests did not meet the standard of “likely relevance” but that one did. A motion to strike portions of one affidavit found to be hearsay was also granted.
- 13/10/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
William Francis Fehrenbach, Lawyer (Kitchener)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 12, 2023.
Amir Shahabi, Paralegal (Concord)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 11, 2023.
Melanie Gloria Christine Zopf, Paralegal (Scarborough)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 10, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Ghazal Qureshi, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 16, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Vahe Avagyan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on October 19, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Cheryl Lisa MacKinnon, Paralegal (Wahnapitae)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 20, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Steven Russell Michael, Lawyer (Kitchener)
Mr. Michael engaged in professional misconduct by failing to act with integrity in four instances, failing to co-operate with Law Society investigations and failing to answer communications with reasonable promptness. His licence is suspended for four months, and he is ordered to pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Vanessa-Lee Routley, Lawyer (Winnipeg, MB)
Ms. Routley engaged in professional misconduct by practicing law and holding herself out as entitled to practice law while her licence was suspended. Her licence is suspended for one month, and he is ordered to pay $3,275 in costs to the Law Society.
Aliamisse Omar Mundulai, Lawyer Applicant (Vaughan)
The panel orders that Mr. Mundulai will pay $5,535 in costs to the Law Society.
Kevin Raymond Hodge, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Mr. Hodge engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain books and records and by failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has brought his books and records into compliance and provided a complete response to the Law Society investigator, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $4,216 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Anant Jain, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The matter proceeded on consent. Mr. Jain is currently the subject of investigations into, amongst other things, two different mortgage fraud schemes; he allegedly represented senior citizens in about 20 transactions but did not caution them about the onerous terms of the mortgages and he was allegedly involved in transactions where mortgages (or higher mortgages) were placed on the borrowers’ properties without their knowledge or consent. The panel found that the evidence provided reasonable grounds to believe there is a serious risk of harm to the public interest. Mr. Jain consented to the interlocutory suspension, and the panel found that the nature of the alleged misconduct required a suspension.
Deborah Ann Williams, Paralegal Applicant (Whitby)
Ms. Williams failed to disclose information relevant to character in her application for licensing to the LSO. The panel found that she misled the LSO in her paralegal licensing application, and ordered that her application for a licence be denied.
Antonio Franco De Bartolo, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The Law Society brought a motion for an interlocutory suspension of Mr. De Bartolo's licence to practise. The panel found that there was evidence that he participated in fraudulent transactions that resulted in substantial losses to multiple parties, and that he misled his client and the Law Society. The test for an interlocutory suspension was met, as there was a risk of harm to the public. Mr. De Bartolo consented to an interlocutory suspension, but regardless, the panel found that a suspension should be ordered because of issues of integrity and trustworthiness. Mr. De Bartolo's licence was therefore suspended on an interlocutory basis.
- 29/09/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Fariborz Haghighat Jou, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 28, 2023.
William Francis Murray, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 28, 2023.
Ronald Ori Davidovic, Lawyer (Sunrise, FL)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 26, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Robert Bruce Gordon Stewart, Lawyer (Collingwood)
Three conduct hearings (21H-036, 22H-031 & 22H-082) will be held on October 2, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Vanessa-Lee Routley, Lawyer (Winnipeg, MB)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on October 6, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Kevin Hodge, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on October 6, 2023 at 1:30 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
John Paul Corrent, Lawyer (Windsor)
Mr. Corrent engaged in professional misconduct by failing to serve a client, failing to act with honour and integrity and charging fees that were not fair or reasonable. He is ordered to refund $50,000 in fees, participate in a Spot Audit and pay $25,000 in costs to the Law Society. His licence is also supended for two months, and is subject to a practice restriction for two years.
Sam Haghparast Rad, Paralegal Applicant (Thornhill)
The panel orders that Mr. Rad will pay $15,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Ngozi Akunna Oti, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Oti engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. Her licence is suspended until she has fully co-operated, and for two months after that, and she is ordered to pay $7,200 in costs to the Law Society.
Anant Jain, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Jain's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Alexandre Papouchine, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Papouchine was unsuccessful in his application and the panel found that he did not meaningfully address any of the Polanski factors in his costs submissions. It also found that the manner in which he presented his case lengthened the hearing, and so Mr. Papouchine was ordered to pay costs of $22,120 over three years.
Rabah Yaacoub Moubarak, Lawyer (Vaughan)
A third party brought a motion for an order restricting openness regarding his name and identifying information. This was done in the context of a conduct application where Mr. Moubarak brought a motion to set aside the agreed statement of facts. In the motion, Mr. Moubarak raised allegations of sexual harassment and abuse by the third party. The panel found that an order restricting openness was required to protect an important public interest (fairness) as the third party would not be able to dispute the allegations. Such an order was also necessary and its benefits outweighed any risk, as the third party’s identity was not central to and would not impact the transparency of the panel's reasons. The panel ordered that the third party’s name and identifying information is not public; the public is to be excluded from portions of the hearing where such information will be discussed; and all materials filed are to be redacted by the parties.
- 22/09/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
No new notices were posted this week.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Sang-Kyun Suh, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 25, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Dunstan Dan Senjule, Lawyer Applicant (Beaverton)
An appeal by the licence applicant will be heard on September 26, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Richard Keith Watson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on September 27, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
John Paul Corrent, Lawyer (Windsor)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 27, 2023 at 1:30 p.m.
Brian Allen Sherman, Lawyer (Aurora)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on September 29, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Antonio Franco De Bartolo, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. De Bartolo's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Alexandre Papouchine, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Papouchine will pay $22,120 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Michael Israel Rappaport, Lawyer (Ottawa)
The panel earlier found that Mr. Rappaport failed to serve his client, failed to encourage respect for the administration of justice and submitted his own evidence before the court by way of an affidavit when this was not permitted. The panel found the misconduct to be serious, multifaceted and lasted throughout his representation of his client. The impact on the client was significant. The panel found that the respondent expressed no remorse or acceptance of responsibility. There were no mitigating or extenuating personal circumstances evident. The panel ordered Mr. Rappaport's licence to be suspended for five months and costs of $55,000 to be paid to the Law Society.
Rabah Yaacoub Moubarak, Lawyer (Vaughan)
The Law Society (LSO) brought a motion for production of parts of the file of Mr. Moubarak's former lawyer. Mr. Moubarak had brought a motion to set aside an agreed statement of facts, claiming that it lacked voluntariness, was based on misrepresentations by the LSO and was inaccurate. The panel found that Mr. Moubarak had waived solicitor-client privilege over some of his communications with his lawyer. It found that he had put the legal advice he received in issue and attempted to selectively rely on parts of these communications while claiming privilege over the remainder. The panel will vet these communications for possible production by the Tribunal to parties for use in this proceeding. Mr. Moubarak is also ordered to provide unredacted copies of emails provided in affidavits to the Law Society.
Madloul Abdul-Amir Aissa Abbadi, Paralegal (Ottawa)
The matter proceeded by way of an agreed statement of facts and joint submission on penalty. Mr. Abbadi was retained to help the clients obtain permanent residency in Canada. He misrepresented to them that he was a lawyer and authorized to provide the services. Mr. Abbadi was found to have provided services outside of the scope of a paralegal licence, and to have breached the Paralegal Rules of Conduct by not depositing the clients’ retainer funds into a trust account. He also failed to render an account and failed to provide a receipt for cash retainers. The panel accepted the joint submission of a two-month suspension and ordered Mr. Abbadi to pay $10,000 in costs.
Adelin-Bogdan Mocanu, Paralegal (Concord)
Mr. Mocanu admitted to misleading the courts and others: practising beyond the scope of his PI licence; failing to properly serve his clients; and failing to render proper accounts and to maintain proper books and records. This included inaccurately putting forward the name of a lawyer who had no involvement in the files as counsel of record. A four-month suspension was imposed along with a costs order of $3,500 as jointly submitted by the parties. The panel found that the proposed penalty was reasonable, considering the serious nature of the misconduct, including Mr. Mocanu's attempt to “game” the system, and mitigating factors such as the absence of a disciplinary record and Mr. Mocanu's co-operation by entering into an agreed statement of facts.
Steven Walter Junger, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Junger did not contest the findings of professional misconduct based on the facts contained in a request to admit that he did not respond to. He was retained on a real estate transaction flowing out of family law proceedings. After the sale of the matrimonial home, Mr. Junger failed to transfer funds in accordance with the interim separation agreement. The client was eventually paid out of funds frozen pursuant to a Mareva order. The Law Society was appointed Trustee over the practice at the same time as the Mareva order. Mr. Junger was suspended on an interlocutory basis in February 2020.
The panel found that Mr. Junger had not satisfied the test for exceptional circumstances, and revoked his licence. The panel also ordered him to pay $11,169 in costs.
Kenneth Robert Dunham, Lawyer (Nepean)
The panel earlier found that Mr. Dunham had engaged in professional misconduct. Prior to the merits hearing he had brought himself into full compliance. Mr. Dunham presented significant evidence in mitigation. His prior disciplinary record is atypical as this hearing occurred during the suspension incurred in the earlier hearing. He also demonstrated considerable remorse. Mr. Dunham was reprimanded and ordered to pay a fine of $3,000 and costs of $2,000 to the Law Society. There was also an undertaking to not discontinue treatment and to comply promptly and fully with all investigative requests in the future.
David Charles Oake, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Oake admitted allegations that he failed to provide a required response to Legal Aid Ontario and communicated in a manner inconsistent with the tone of a professional communication. The panel accepted the joint submission of a proposed penalty of a reprimand and an order for costs of $5,000 as reasonable and consistent with Tribunal jurisprudence.
Alec McLeod McLennan, Lawyer (Oakville)
Mr. McLennan had been found to have misappropriated $140,000 and misapplied $188,500 and to have failed to co-operate with the Law Society’s investigation. The panel found the presumptive penalty of revocation of Mr. McLennan's licence to be appropriate given the nature of the conduct. An order for costs of $49,075 was found to be reasonable given the relative straightforward evidence and Mr. McLennan's conduct in the hearing, which lasted eight days. He was also ordered to reimburse the Compensation Fund up to a maximum $328,000.
- 15/09/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
John Paul McLaughlin, Lawyer (Oakville)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on September 14, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Giuseppe Jr. Campisi, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held from September 19-21, 2023 at 1:00 p.m.
Peter Ian Murray, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held from September 19-21, 2023 at 1:00 p.m.
Ngozi Akunna Oti, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on September 22, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Michael Israel Rappaport, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Rappaport engaged in professional misconduct by failing to serve his client to the standard of a competent lawyer, failing to encourage respect for the administration of justice, and submitting evidence by way of affidavit when he was not permitted to do so. His licence is suspended for five months and he is ordered to pay $55,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Caleesis M. Telesh, Lawyer Applicant (Whitby)
Ms. Telesh made an application for an L1 licence. This was not opposed by the Law Society, though she had previously been subject of three complaints alleging that, under different names, she had previously falsely represented herself as a legal consultant, attorney or legal specialist and engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. The Law Society was unable to reach her and ultimately obtained a court order permanently enjoining Ms. Telesh from practising law, among other terms. The panel found that based on Ms. Telesh's background as a refugee and personal experience of domestic violence, she did not fully understand her involvement in the previous provision of legal services or voluntarily participate in illegal activity. She showed remorse for her actions and any harm that may have been caused. Her pursuit of her legal education and volunteer work spoke positively to her character, and the conduct was accepted as isolated and unlikely to recur. The panel found that Ms. Telesh had established that she is currently of good character. No costs were ordered.
- 08/09/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
There were no new notices posted this week.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
AA, Lawyer Applicant (Undefined)
A motion within an appeal by the Law Society will be heard on September 11, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Anant Jain, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction will be heard on September 12 & 13, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Antonio Franco De Bartolo, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction will be heard on September 14 & 15, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Alisa Mazo, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on September 15, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Alec Mcleod McLennan, Lawyer (Oakville)
Mr. McLennan engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating or misapplying trust funds and failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigator. His licence is revoked, he is ordered to repay the Compensation Fund up to $328,500, as well as $49,075 in costs to the Law Society.
Caleesis M. Telesh, Lawyer Applicant (Whitby)
Mr. Telesh is presently of good character, and so is eligible to be granted an L1 licence.
James Douglas Skinner, Lawyer (London)
Mr. Skinner engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by misappropriating $98,600 in trust funds. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $2,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society provided evidence of many instances of comments and allegations made by Mr. Robson against the opposing party and her counsel. The panel found that the instances were, for the most part, gratuitous, hyperbolic and venomous. The comments and allegations were not made in good faith but rather were a systematic attempt to humiliate and intimidate the opposite party, attack the competence of her counsel, and attempt to destroy the solicitor-client relationship.
Mr. Robson made allegations against three judges in the course of acrimonious proceedings. The panel found that his response to judicial decisions he disapproved of was to personally attack the judge as a form of retribution. The panel found that these were part of a long-standing pattern of vicious and mean-spirited personal attacks.
The panel found that Mr. Robson's medical evidence regarding his mental health did not establish a defence to the allegations of professional misconduct, and so directed that a penalty hearing be scheduled.
Maria Louisa L. Diaz, Lawyer (Unionville)
The Law Society brought a motion for an interlocutory suspension because its investigation provided evidence that Ms. Diaz had misappropriated significant funds from client trust accounts, among other allegations of professional misconduct. Ms. Diaz had a previous discipline history involving two previous findings of professional misconduct, including a penalty of a 75-day suspension. The panel found that the test for an interlocutory suspension was met, as there were reasonable grounds for believing that there is a significant risk of harm to members of the public. Further, it found that misappropriating trust funds is an allegation that bears directly on Ms. Diaz's integrity and trustworthiness and that there is a reasonable prospect of revocation. Ms. Diaz also consented to the interlocutory suspension. The panel ordered an interlocutory suspension of Ms. Diaz's licence to practise law.
Lorne Howard Albaum, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society alleged that Mr. Albaum engaged in professional misconduct by using his trust account for purposes not related to the practice of law; failing to verify the identity of his client; and in disbursing funds from trust in breach of a trust condition. The panel found that the first two allegations were established. Regarding a series of transactions where funds were received and disbursed from Mr. Albaum’s trust accounts, the panel found that these transactions were not related to the provision of legal services. It found that use of trust accounts must be related to actual transactions or other legal services but that this was not the case here. Business or client development consisting of providing banking services was not a legitimate use of Mr. Albaum's trust account, and further, the panel found that he did not establish that he had a reasonable expectation that he would provide future legal services for his clients. The panel found that the allegation of disbursing funds from trust in breach of a trust condition was not established. A penalty hearing is to be scheduled.
Milica Birkett, Paralegal Applilcant (Oshawa)
The Law Society appealed a finding by the Hearing Division that Ms. Birkett had established that she is currently of good character. It argued that the panel had erred as it made findings inconsistent with the evidence in determining that Ms. Birkett was currently of good character. The appeal panel found that the Hearing Division did not make a palpable and overriding error, as the majority’s findings were not inconsistent with the evidence, and it considered the relevant factors and evidence in making its determination that Ms. Birkett was currently of good character. The appeal was therefore dismissed. The respondent did not seek costs and none were ordered.
- 25/08/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Myles Frederick McLellan, Lawyer Applicant (Sault Ste. Marie)
A notice of appeal by the licence applicant was filed on August 24, 2023.
AA, Lawyer (Undefined)
A notice of appeal by the Law Society was filed on August 22, 2023.
Danielle Shannon Harrison, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on August 21, 2023.
Kevin Hodge, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 18, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings (LCN66-16 & 17H-065) will be held on August 29, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Steven Russell Michael, Lawyer (Kitchener)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 1, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Vaibhav Phukela, Paralegal (Oakville)
Mr. Phukela engaged in professional misconduct by failing to deposit money into a trust account, providing legal services through impermissible business structures, failing to serve 22 clients, failing to update his contact information with the Law Society, and failing to satisfy or comply with an order of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $12,155.
Michael Hassard, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Hassard will pay $13,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Maria Louisa L. Diaz, Lawyer (Unionville)
Ms. Diaz's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Sheyam Balamurali, Paralegal Applicant (Vaughan)
Mr. Balamurali failed to fully disclose his history of criminal and driving offences; however, the panel found that the he had not deliberately attempted to mislead the Law Society or to misrepresent his record. Between 2014 and 2019, Mr. Balamurali was charged with a number of traffic violations, including, in 2018, an incident for which he was criminally charged with dangerous and impaired driving and other offences. He completed the licensing application form prior to the trial and sentencing related to the 2018 incident. He disclosed that he was currently the subject of criminal proceedings but did not disclose the outcome of the sentencing until a year later. After reviewing the Armstrong factors the panel found that the Mr. Balamurali is currently of good character and eligible to be licensed as a paralegal practitioner.
Timothy Kent Mobberley, Paralegal (London)
While the panel did not find Mr. Mobberley's conduct to be intentionally dishonest or misleading as alleged by the Law Society, it did find that he was intentionally reckless when he failed to review the notice of garnishment and his own affidavit before it was filed with the Small Claims Court. The panel directed that a penalty hearing is to be scheduled.
Azmat Raj Kumar Ramal-Shah, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Ramal-Shah had been found to have engaged in professional misconduct, and a one-month suspension was imposed. The Law Society requested a reduced amount of costs of $9,000 with two years to pay. Mr. Ramal-Shah asked that no costs be awarded given his lack of employment income and debts. The panel considered factors such as the complexity and length of the hearing, conduct which resulted in some wasted time, his ultimate acceptance of responsibility, his ability to pay, his misconduct, and future potential for employment. It found that there was no reason to forego payment of all costs, but ordered a reduced costs amount of $6,000 with three years to pay.
Keith Stuart Shaw, Paralegal (Greely)
Mr. Shaw failed to co-operate with an investigation by the Law Society in response to a number of complaints relating to professional misconduct. He received notice but did not attend the hearing, so the panel proceeded in his absence. Mr. Shaw was found to have engaged in professional misconduct. Based on principles of progressive discipline, the panel ordered an indefinite suspension until he responded to the Law Society’s requests, an additional two-month suspension, as well as a $2,000 fine. Requested costs of $3,000 were found to be reasonable.
Vahe Avagyan, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel rejected Mr. Avagyan's claims that he did not receive most of the communications from the Law Society and that he believed that he had complied with the spot auditor’s requests. The panel found that he received many, though not all, of the communications, and that he failed to respond. The panel directed that a penalty hearing should be scheduled.
Aliamisse Omar Mundulai, Lawyer Applicant (Vaughan)
Mr. Mundulai had applied to be re-licensed as a lawyer. The hearing panel dismissed the application because Mr. Mundulai had failed to disclose criminal charges and more on the licensing application form. The hearing panel had also concluded that Mr. Mundulai was not presently of good character. The Appeal Division concluded that the hearing panel chair acted reasonably in limiting Mr. Mundulai's cross-examination. The Appeal Division found the hearing panel did not misapprehend the evidence and that Mr. Mundulai could not identify an error in principle in the panel’s reasoning. The appeal was dismissed and timelines set out for submissions on costs.
- 18/08/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Vanessa-Lee Routley, Lawyer (Winnipeg, M.B.)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 17, 2023.
Ngozi Akunna Oti, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 9, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Cheryl Lisa MacKinnon, Paralegal (Wahnapitae)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 23, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
James Douglas Skinner, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 25, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Aliamisse Omar Mundulai, Lawyer Applicant (Vaughan)
Mr. Mundulai's appeal is dismissed.
Azmat Raj Kumar Ramal-Shah, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Ramal-Shah will pay $6,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Peter John Craniotis, Lawyer (Oakville)
Mr. Craniotis engaged in professional misconduct by withdrawing funds from his mixed trust account to pay for personal and business expenses, failing to act with integrity, mishandling $9,020 of client trust funds and failing to maintain books and records. His licence is suspended for one month, and he is ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Jacinto Victor Silva Vieira, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Vieira was charged with multiple offences following a Toronto Police Service Sex Crimes Unit child luring investigation. The panel noted that the nature of the criminal charges is such that the low threshold established by s. 49.27(2) has been met, and described the nature of the charges as disturbing and addressing fundamental integrity. The panel concluded that the Tribunal’s jurisprudence does not currently support the argument that presumptive revocation would apply here if the misconduct is proven. Sexual misconduct encompasses a broad range of misconduct and the same penalty does not invariably arise for each case. It was not alleged that Mr. Vieira was in a position of trust or authority with respect to the alleged victim. The panel also noted that Mr. Vieira is presumed innocent. It concluded that the proposed restrictions would not have a meaningful effect and ordered Mr. Vieira’s licence to be suspended on an interlocutory basis.
Richard Keith Watson, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel found that the Law Society established the requisite evidentiary basis for a finding of “reasonable suspicion” under s. 49(3) of the Law Society Act, and that Mr. Watson had engaged in professional misconduct as alleged. The panel declined to find that Mr. Watson intentionally misled the panel, and directed that a date be set for a penalty hearing.
- 11/08/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Ryan James Stewart Deacon, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 8, 2023.
Anant Jain, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on August 8, 2023.
Antonio Franco De Bartolo, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on August 9, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Richard Craig Anthony Patterson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held from August 14 to 18, 2023 starting each day at 10:00 a.m.
Deborah Ann Williams, Paralegal Applicant (Whitby)
A licensing hearing will be held on August 15 and 16, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Franklyn Scott Taylor, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 15, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Peter John Craniotis, Lawyer (Oakville)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 16, 2023 at 1:30 p.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
There were no new orders posted this week.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
There were no new reasons posted this week.
- 04/08/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
No new regulatory notices were filed this week.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Andrew Gordon Rogerson, Lawyer (Barrie)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 9 and 10, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
AA, Lawyer Applicant
The panel found that the applicant is presently of good character.
Michael Hassard, Lawyer Applicant (Burlington)
The panel found that the applicant deemed not to meet the requirements for a licence under the By-Laws and is not presently of good character.
André Bluteau, Avocat (d'Ottawa)
L’intimé a omis de fournir des services juridiques entrepris selon la norme exigée d’un avocat compétent. L’intimé n’a pas fait preuve de courtoisie, de politesse et de bonne foi dans ses rapports professionnels. L’intimé est suspendu immédiatement pour une période de six mois et versera des dépens d’un montant totalisant 25 919,00$
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Alec McLeod McLennan, Lawyer (Oakville)
The Lawyer was alleged and found to have misappropriated $140,000 and misapplied $188,500 that had been deposited into his trust account for an estate client. He did not establish that his health issues explained his failure to respond to the Law Society’s requests for information or that the Law Society had failed to accommodate him. The panel found that he failed to co-operate with the Law Society’s investigation. A penalty and costs hearing has been heard with reasons to follow.
Georgiana Stefania Masgras-Irshidat, Lawyer (Kitchener)
The Lawyer sought costs of $81,559.08 following the dismissal of the Law Society’s conduct application. The panel found that an order for costs against the Law Society was not merited, as the proceeding was not unwarranted or without reasonable cause. There were competing theories about what happened that were both reasonable, and the outcome was dependent on determinations of credibility and findings of fact made by the hearing panel. The panel found that the Lawyer had not met the high threshold for awarding costs against the Law Society, and dismissed her request for costs.
Winfield Edward Corcoran, Lawyer (Hamilton)
The Law Society brought a motion to rely upon the findings of fact from a criminal proceeding as proof of those facts and to prohibit the Lawyer from re-litigating the findings of fact. The panel found that the abuse of process doctrine applied and granted the motion, finding that it would be unfair to allow the Lawyer to re-litigate findings of fact relating to issues such as his lack of understanding of criminal trial procedure and substantive law in the context of a sexual assault trial. Even though he was not a party, the Lawyer had notice and an opportunity to respond regarding issues of ineffective assistance to his client. The trial judge was in the best position to make findings of fact regarding in-court conduct of the Lawyer. Principles of finality and the integrity of the administration of justice also supported granting the Law Society’s motion
Myles Frederick McLellan, Lawyer Applicant (Sault Ste. Marie)
The applicant’s licence had been revoked in 2009 in relation to misappropriation. He had been criminally convicted in relation to fraud. He provided an Agreed Statement of Facts regarding the previous misconduct. The panel found that the applicant had not established that he is presently of good character. Despite his involvement in the community, his educational achievements were of limited relevance to rehabilitation. He did not show sufficient remorse and had failed to provide meaningful restitution. The Law Society is invited to make submissions on costs.
AA, Lawyer Applicant
The applicant had engaged in three incidents of sexual abuse of minor children in 2009. He previously applied to be licensed in 2012 but was not forthcoming about these incidents, and withdrew his application. He now re-applied for a licence to practise law. The panel found that the nature and extent of the behaviour was severe, but that based on his remorse, rehabilitative efforts, the fact that there had not been further incidents of abuse since 2009 and the significant passage of time, he has established that he is currently of good character and is eligible to be licensed, subject to a condition that he not meet with minor children while unsupervised.
Kirkor Avedis Apel, Lawyer (Markham)
The Lawyer acknowledged that he had engaged in misconduct. The panel found that he failed to fully comply with his client’s instructions or failed to clarify the instructions and that he failed to serve his client by failing to provide timely and clear updates on the status of litigation and failing to promptly respond to communications. The Lawyer also failed to provide a substantive response to requests for invoices and/or an accounting. The parties jointly submitted that the penalty should be a 30-day suspension and that the Lawyer should pay $8,000 in costs. The panel accepted the joint submission as not contrary to the public interest and accepted it. The Lawyer was suspended for 30 days starting May 1, 2023 and ordered to pay $8,000 in costs to the Law Society
Michael Hassard, Lawyer Applicant (Burlington)
The lawyer licence applicant disclosed in his application form a New York conviction for driving while intoxicated and that he was wrongly accused of sexual assault in Toronto. Because of misleading, inconsistent and inaccurate statements regarding the latter incident, the panel found that the applicant was not forthright or accurate in the information provided to the Law Society during the licensing process or before the Tribunal and therefore did not meet licensing requirements. Further, he did not show that he is presently of good character because of his lack of candour and lack of appreciation, remorse or acknowledgement regarding his conduct, despite his strong background of community work. Evidence from character witnesses was given limited weight, as it was found that they did not have full knowledge of the applicant’s conduct. The application for licensing was dismissed.
André Bluteau, Avocat (d'Ottawa)
L’audience a procédé en l’absence de l’intimé. L’intimé a maintenu une position juridique déraisonnable concernant la compétence du tribunal, malgré plusieurs ordonnances judiciaires contraires. L’intimé a conseillé à son client de désobéir à diverses ordonnances du tribunal – Il n’a pas fait preuve de courtoisie, de politesse et de bonne foi dans ses rapports professionnels. Le permis de l’avocat a été suspendu pour une durée indéterminée suivie d’une période de six mois. L’avocat a aussi été enjoint à payer des dépens de 25 919 $.
- 28/07/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Armenak Martin Dumanian, Lawyer Applicant (Oakville)
A notice of appeal by the licensee applicant was filed on July 24, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Hamza Nurdin Hassan Kisaka, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 31, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Milica Birkett, Paralegal Applicant (Oshawa)
The Law Society's appeal from the Hearing Division's January 23, 2023 order was dismissed.
Myles Frederick McLellan, Lawyer Applicant (Sault Ste. Marie)
The panel found that Mr. McLellan is not presently of good character and so his application for licensing was dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
There were no new reasons posted this week.
- 21/07/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Marjan Hatamzadeh, Paralegal Applicant (Richmond Hill)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on July 17, 2023.
Adam Tynne Joseph Castonguay, Lawyer (Sudbury)
A notice of motion to vary or cancel an interlocutory order was filed on July 14, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
John Calvin Edwin Barry, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 24, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Maria Louisa L. Diaz, Lawyer (Unionville)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on July 25, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Madloul Abdul-Amir Aissa Abbadi, Paralegal (Ottawa)
Mr. Abbadi engaged in professional misconduct by failing to deposit client retainer money into a trust account, failing to render an account, failing to issue a receipt for cash received from a client, and providing services outside the scope of his licence, or holding himself out as a person who can provide services outside the scope of his licence. His licence is suspended for two months, and he is ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Deborah Anne Humphreys, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
The Law Society's appeal is dismissed as moot.
James Douglas Stewart Bowie, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Bowie engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for two months after that, and he is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Armenak Martin Dumanian, Lawyer Applicant (Oakville)
The panel orders that Mr. Dumanian will pay $20,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Steven Walter Junger, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Junger engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating $685,071.39 in client trust funds, misapplying approximately $200,000 in client trust funds and using personal funds to reimburse a client's trust fund shortage. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $11,169 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Deborah Anne Humphreys, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
The Law Society appealed a decision imposing a supervision order on Ms. Humphreys' trust account, arguing that the panel erred in failing to order an interlocutory suspension of licence. The panel found that the appeal was moot, as it appeared that the respondent’s licence to practise was now suspended.
Andrew John Sanders, Lawyer (St. Thomas)
Mr. Sanders admitted that his actions while estate trustee and solicitor for an estate constituted professional misconduct and/or conduct unbecoming; he failed to distribute the residue of the estate within the time specified in the will, “borrowed” funds from the estate, paid himself excessive compensation and misled the Probate Court. Mr. Sanders' licence was revoked, and he was ordered to pay $8,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Veronica Joyce McAlea Ceponis, Lawyer (Sarnia)
Ms. Ceponis provided an Agreed Statement of Facts, admitting to failing to serve her client regarding an application for a renewal of a student immigration permit and then failing to communicate with her client in a timely or candid fashion. The panel accepted the joint submission for a penalty of two months and costs of $5,000, taking into account factors such as the need for legal services in the area where Ms. Ceponis practises, financial hardship and Ms. Ceponis' co-operation, which shortened the hearing.
James Douglas Stewart Bowie, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Bowie was represented but did not attend the hearing and no explanation was provided, so the panel proceeded in his absence. The Law Society requested information in relation to an investigation of allegations, including that Mr. Bowie had offered to exchange legal services for sexual favours. The Law Society’s evidence that Mr. Bowie did not provide complete responses was uncontested, and the panel found that he had failed to co-operate with the Law Society. Mr. Bowie had a previous discipline history for failure to co-operate and was under indefinite suspension followed by a one-month suspension until he fulfilled the Law Society’s request. Based on principles of progressive discipline, the panel ordered an additional two-month suspension to follow the indefinite suspension pending compliance. Mr. Bowie was also ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
- 14/07/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Eshita Dawra, Lawyer Applicant (Brampton)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on July 7, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Caleesis M. Telesh, Lawyer Applicant (Whitby)
A licensing hearing will be held on July 17 & 18, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Nahid Rahimi, Paralegal (North York)
Two conduct hearings (22H-102 & 21H-159) will be held on July 17 & 18, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Lorne Howard Albaum, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 17, 2023 at 10:00 a.m.
Madloul Abdul-Amir Aissa Abbadi, Paralegal (Ottawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 19, 2023 at 1:30 p.m.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 21, 2023 at 9:30 a.m.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Kirkor Avedis Apel, Lawyer (Markham)
Mr. Apel engaged in professional misconduct. His licence is suspended for 30 days, and he is ordered to pay $8,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Jacinto Victor Silva Vieira, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Vieira's licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
A S M Tofazzel Haque, Lawyer (Scarborough)
The Law Society received three complaints about Mr. Haque, and the investigator found substantial fund shortages in the trust account. Mr. Haque acknowledged that he had not kept his financial records in compliance with By-Law 9 but submitted that his only issue was poor bookkeeping and record keeping so that a supervision order would be sufficient to protect the public, rather than a suspension order. The panel concluded that Mr. Haque allowed negative balances in the trust account to persist for extended periods of time. This placed clients’ funds in significant jeopardy, while his handling of clients’ trust funds put his honesty and integrity into question. The Panel therefore suspended Mr. Haque's licence.
- 07/07/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Jonathan Nicholas Ferris, Lawyer (Guelph)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 30, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Azmat Raj Kumar Ramal-Shah, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 10, 2023 at 11:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Chantel Dorothy Twizell, Paralegal (New Lowell)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 12, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Steven Walter Junger, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 13, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
A capacity hearing will be held on July 13, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Milica Birkett, Paralegal Applicant (Oshawa)
An appeal by the Law Society will be heard on July 14, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Mehrdad Pashangpour, Paralegal (Newmarket)
Mr. Pashangpour engaged in professional misconduct and/or conduct unbecoming by twice engaging in misleading advertising, providing legal services to five clients when his licence was in a non-practicing status, mishandling trust funds, misappropriating funds, failing to communicate with five clients, providing services to five clients outside the permitted scope of a paralegal, and failing to provide legal services with honour and integrity. His licence is revoked, he is ordered to refund retainer fees paid by five clients, and he is ordered to pay $70,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Adelin-Bogdan Mocanu, Paralegal (Concord)
Mr. Mocanu engaged in professional misconduct by twice failing to act with honour, integrity, and in good faith, providing legal services outside his permissible scope of practice, failing to serve a client, twice failing to render an account justifying his fees and disbursements, and failing to maintain books and records. His licence is suspended for four months, he is ordered to complete three additional hours of continuing professional development, and he is ordered to pay $3,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Adam Michael Salvona, Paralegal (London)
Mr. Salvona’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Jitendra Kumar Sood, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Sood sought costs following the dismissal of the Law Society’s conduct application. The panel found that the proceeding was warranted by Mr. Sood’s problematic testimony before the Small Claims Court and his apparent misrepresentation to the Divisional Court. It was only after careful analysis and six days of hearing that the panel ultimately concluded that the Law Society had not proved its case. The panel found that Mr. Sood had not met the high threshold for awarding costs against the Law Society and ordered that there would be no costs of this application.
Sang-Kyun Suh, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society alleged that Mr. Suh had engaged in conduct unbecoming a licensee, including the use of offensive language toward and sexual harassment of a junior staff member, and sexual harassment of a client’s parent. The panel found that some of the allegations of failure to act with courtesy and civility and sexual harassment of a staff member were established on a balance of probabilities, but that the allegations regarding sexual harassment of the client’s parent were not established. The panel will reconvene to determine penalty and costs.
Ritchie James Linton, Lawyer (Brampton)
Mr. Linton became estate trustee for two estates. The beneficiary was a vulnerable person receiving provincial disability benefits. In order to avoid impacting her entitlement to these benefits, Mr. Linton transferred the estate funds into his trust account and provided her with a monthly allowance. Mr. Linton agreed that he failed to affect the final distribution of the estates, pay interest on or invest the estate funds on behalf of the Beneficiary, and that he used his trust account for purposes unrelated to the practice of law. The panel noted mitigating factors including that Mr. Linton’s actions did not result in significant gain to him, that his intentions were to respect the wishes of the estates to take care of the vulnerable beneficiary, and that he co-operated with the Law Society and admitted his misconduct. The proposed joint submission of a two-month suspension was accepted, as it was within the range of penalties for similar cases and addresses the goals of general and specific deterrence, and the requested order for costs of $15,000 was reasonable.
- 30/06/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Priashna Singh, Lawyer (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 27, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Michael Israel Rappaport, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 4, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Adelin-Bogdan Mocanu, Paralegal (Concord)
Two conduct hearings (22H-078 & 23H-007) will be held on July 5, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Mehrdad Pashangpour, Paralegal (Newmarket)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 5, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jacinto Victor Silva Vieira, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on July 6, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Vahe Avagyan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on July 7, 2023 at 1:30 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Keith Stuart Shaw, Paralegal (Greely)
Mr. Shaw engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with four Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for two months after that. A $2,000 fine is ordered, along with a conditional $2,000 fine if he has not co-operated by July 24, 2023. He is also ordered to pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Andrew John Sanders, Lawyer (St. Thomas)
Mr. Sanders engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating funds, twice failing to act with integrity, and failing to complete administration of an estate within the three years stipulated by the will. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $8,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Jitendra Kumar Sood, Lawyer (Toronto)
There will be no order as to costs.
Armenak Martin Dumanian, Lawyer Applicant (Oakville)
Mr. Dumanian made a false or misleading statement in connection with his licensing application and is not presently of good character, and so his licensing application is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Armenak Martin Dumanian, Lawyer Applicant (Oakville)
Mr. Dumanian was found to have failed to provide complete and accurate details about previous allegations of sexual misconduct from a university where he had been a graduate student. He had been found to have had sexual contact with four different women undergraduate students without consent. The panel found that he misstated the details of the penalty imposed and incorrectly stated in his application that he had not accepted the findings of misconduct by the university. It found that he had made false or misleading declarations in his application for a licence to practise law, and that he was not presently of good character. Mr. Dumanian’s application for licensing was therefore dismissed, and the Law Society was invited to make submissions on costs.
- 23/06/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
There were no new notices posted this week.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
There are no hearings scheduled for next week.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Courtney Akinwale Kazembe, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Kazembe engaged in professional misconduct by acting for both borrowers and lenders on mortgage or loan transactions, acting for clients where there was a conflict of interest, failing to perform legal services, failing to candidly advise his lender clients, failing to preserve and account for the property of his lender clients, failing to properly complete required forms, and failing to discharge his responsibilities with honour and integrity. He is granted permission to surrender his licence, and is not permitted to apply to be re-licenced in Ontario unless he repays all legal fees charged to his lender clients on the syndicated mortgage in issue.
John Zadkovich, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Mr. Zadkovich engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that. If he has not co-operated by August 30, 2023, he is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine. He is also ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Kristine Genevieve Holder, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel found that Ms. Holder practised law while administratively suspended due to non-compliance with CPD and other obligations. She was co-operative and remorseful. The parties agreed to a five-month suspension but disagreed as to when the suspension should begin. The panel decided to suspend Ms. Holder for five months, commencing November 15, 2022, and ordered her to pay $10,000 in costs.
Jenna Leigh Warman, Paralegal Applicant (North York)
Ms. Warman was convicted of a misdemeanour in the United States on a guilty plea. The misconduct took place over 13 years ago while she was between 19 and 20 years of age. The panel found that her age, stressed circumstances, limited involvement and coercion were all mitigating factors. The panel also found that Ms. Warman had positively addressed significant life challenges in regards to her mental health and substance abuse problems. While she made an error in completing her reinstatement request after her first licensing application was deemed abandoned, the panel found that this did not amount to misconduct. The panel concluded that Ms. Warman showed clear insight into her misconduct and learned from it and found that she is presently of good character and eligible to be licensed.
Dunstan Dan Senjule, Lawyer Applicant (Newmarket)
The panel dismissed Mr. Senjule’s application for licensing following a prior decision revoking his licence. The panel concluded that some reduction from the amount of costs sought by the Law Society was warranted due to the duplication of work that inevitably occurred when the file was transferred, as well as hearing time taken up by the Law Society with unmeritorious legal arguments. The application was not doomed to failure from the start. Mr. Senjule did not provide evidence regarding his ability to pay. The panel ordered Mr. Senjule to pay $7,500 in cost to the Law Society.
- 16/06/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Maria Louisa L. Diaz, Lawyer (Unionville)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on June 14, 2023.
Michael Allison Constable, Lawyer (North Bay)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 13, 2023.
Anthony Orian Kevin Maniaci, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 13, 2023.
Darren Deenosan Kirupa, Lawyer (Ajax)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 12, 2023.
John Paul McLaughlin, Lawyer (Oakville)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 1, 2023.
Antonio Caruso, Paralegal (Niagara Falls)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 9, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
John Calvin Edwin Barry, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held from June 19-23, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Tracey Marie Resetar, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on June 19, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 19 & 20, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
André Bluteau, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 20 & 21, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings (17H-065 & LCN66-16) will be held on June 20 & 22, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by
Claudio Martini, Lawyer (Windsor)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on June 22, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
videoconference.
Keith Stuart Shaw, Paralegal (Greely)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 23, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Jenna Leigh Warman, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Ms. Warman is presently of good character, and so is eligible to be granted a P1 licence.
Dunstan Dan Senjule, Lawyer Applicant (Newmarket)
The panel orders that Mr. Senjule will pay $7,500 in costs to the Law Society.
A S M Tofazzel Haque, Lawyer (Scarborough)
Mr. Haque’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Peel)
Ms. Deokaran appealed decisions of the Hearing Division granting the Law Society’s motion for an interlocutory suspension and ordering $60,357.96 in costs. This related to allegations arising from 17 complaints received from former clients, opposing counsel and members of the judiciary which involved, among other things, unprofessional communications, false representations and affidavits, threatening a client that he would be deported while demanding more money from him and sending damaging correspondence about her client to opposing counsel. The majority of the panel found that the Hearing Division did not err in ordering an interlocutory suspension, as it did not err in considering Ms. Deokaran’s use of a possibly misleading Notice of Application to Divisional Court, in its determination. It did provide adequate reasons, considering the extensive evidence in support of the allegations of professional misconduct provided, it did not err in imposing an interlocutory suspension instead of continuing the previously imposed supervision order, and did not err in ordering costs, despite the fact that it did not respond to Ms. Deokaran’s numerous requests for further extensions of time to provide her submissions. Regarding these requests for an extension of time, the panel found that Ms. Deokaran had never made any submissions regarding why she required further time, and in fact never provided submissions on costs, despite the fact that the Tribunal put her on notice that no submissions had been provided, and the panel did not issue its decision until many weeks after the initial extended deadline for her submissions.
The dissenting panel member found that the fact that the Hearing Division panel never responded to Ms. Deokaran’s numerous requests for a further extension of time amounted to a breach of procedural fairness, as this may have created confusion and a reasonable expectation that Ms. Deokaran was still waiting to hear back from the panel before providing her submission on costs. The result was that the costs issue was decided without her being heard. The dissenting panel member would have allowed the appeal on costs and returned the issue of costs to be heard by a different panel of the Hearing Division.
William Ndze Fuhgeh, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Having earlier dismissed the appeal in its entirety, the panel dealt with costs in writing. It found that Mr. Fuhgeh created unnecessary complexity in the proceeding and the proceeding was unduly lengthy. Mr. Fuhgeh was also unsuccessful in his stay and fresh evidence motions. The panel accepted that Mr. Fuhgeh had a limited ability to pay costs, and so ordered $35,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Sheila Joy Stanislawski, Lawyer (Nepean)
The Law Society sought costs of about $8,000 in relation to two unsuccessful motions brought by Ms. Stanislawski, one to set aside the deemed abandonment of her appeal, and the second regarding a request for funding for transcripts for her appeal. Considering the factors in assessing costs, the panel found that the Law Society’s request for costs was fair and reasonable, reasoning that the legal professions should not bear the costs of litigation when the licensee or former licensee is unsuccessful. The panel found that Ms. Stanislawski’s conduct lengthened the proceeding with motions that had little merit, and that she did not provide sufficient evidence to show that she faced financial hardship. The panel therefore ordered costs of $8,000.
- 09/06/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Divja Satija, Lawyer Applicant (Ambe Majra, India)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on June 6, 2023.
Ian Andrew Brisbin, Lawyer (Burlington)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 5, 2023.
Alexandre Papouchine, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of appeal by the licence applicant was filed on June 2, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Charlene Dorothy Desrochers, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A motion within a conduct hearing and a capacity hearing will be held on June 12, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Lorne Howard Albaum, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held from June 12-16, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Nahid Rahimi, Paralegal (North York)
Two conduct hearings (21H-159 & 22H-102) will be held from June 12-14, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Courtney Akinwale Kazembe, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 14, 2023 at 2:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Richard Keith Watson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 15, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
John Calvin Edwin Barry, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 16, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Vahe Avagyan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 16, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Alisa Mazo, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on June 16, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
James Douglas Stewart Bowie, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 16, 2023 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Sheila Joy Stanislawski, Lawyer (Nepean)
The panel orders that Ms. Stanislawski will pay $8,000 in costs to the Law Society.
William Ndze Fuhgeh, Lawyer (Ottawa)
The panel orders that Mr. Fuhgeh will pay $35,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Peel)
Ms. Deokaran’s appeal is dismissed.
Michael Kohl, Lawyer (Etobicoke)
Mr. Kohl engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that. He is ordered to pay a $2,500 fine, and a further $2,500 fine if he has not complied by July 2, 2023. He is also ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Kenneth Robert Dunham, Lawyer (Nepean)
Mr. Dunham engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. A reprimand is ordered, along with a fine of $3,000, the signing of an Undertaking, and $2,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Danielle Shannon Harrison, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The Law Society brought a motion for an interlocutory suspension based on its investigation concerning whether Ms. Harrison participated in or facilitated a predatory mortgage loan scheme involving vulnerable senior citizens, misled the Law Society about her continued involvement with recurrent participants in the scheme, and used a trust account as a sole practitioner without disclosing this to the Law Society as required. The panel found that the mortgage transactions exhibited many red flags of predatory lending schemes, including a 25% usurious annual interest rate imposed on elderly borrowers living on modest fixed incomes, and that Ms. Harrison failed to advise her borrower clients of the very concerning terms of these often unnecessary mortgages, which would likely lead to default. The panel also found that there appeared to be a lack of integrity in Ms. Harrison’s dealings with the Law Society as a result of her failure to disclose all of her trust accounts when requested. It granted the motion for an interlocutory suspension, finding that the evidence showed that there were reasonable grounds for believing that there was a significant risk of harm to the public and/or to the public interest in the administration of justice. Costs of the motion were reserved to the panel presiding at the hearing of the merits of the proceeding.
- 02/06/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Yuce Baykara, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 30, 2023.
Maria Frances Marusic, Lawyer (Windsor)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on May 26, 2023.
Jacinto Victor Silva Vieira, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on May 26, 2023.
David Simoes Malgueiro Campos, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on May 18, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Sheyam Balamurali, Paralegal Applicant (Vaughan)
A licensing hearing will be held on June 6, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 7, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
A S M Tofazzel Haque, Lawyer (Scarborough)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction will be heard on June 9, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
David Charles Oake, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Oake engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond to Legal Aid Ontario regarding a complaint made by his client, and by making insulting comments regarding that same client to Legal Aid Ontario. A reprimand is ordered, along with $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
John Zadkovich, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Mr. Zadkovich’s licence is suspended, pending the disposition of the application.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Joseph Jalal Kanoni, Paralegal (Cambridge)
Mr. Kanoni advised that he did not wish to be present for the hearing and that he consented to it proceeding without his participation. The panel accepted the joint submission and ordered Mr. Kanoni’s licence is revoked and $5,000 in costs to be paid to the Law Society.
- 26/05/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Sergio Grillone, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 23, 2023.
Sam Haghparast Rad, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of appeal by the paralegal applicant was filed on May 23, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Nahid Rahimi, Paralegal (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held from May 29 to June 2, 2023 at 10:00am each day by videoconference.
Timothy Kent Mobberley, Paralegal (London)
A conduct will be held from May 29 to June 1, 2023 at 10:00am each day by videoconference.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, Lawyer (London)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 31, 2023 at 10:00am by videoconference.
Kristin Ernest Stewart, Lawyer (Toronto)
A capacity hearing will be held on June 1, 2023 at 10:00am by videoconference.
Alec McLeod McLennan, Lawyer (Oakville)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 2, 2023 at 10:00am by videoconference
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Manmohan Singh Hans, Paralegal (Caledon)
Mr. Han engaged in professional misconduct by providing legal services while his licence was suspended, failing to act with honesty and integrity and misleading clients. His licence was suspended for 10 months commencing May 18, 2023. Mr. Han was ordered to refund fees and disbursements and pay $10,000 in costs.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Robson was ordered to pay costs of approximately $20,000 to the Law Society.
Jim Koumarelas, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Koumarelas engaged in professional misconduct by failing to serve his client to the standard of a competent lawyer and failing to return the client’s file. Mr. Koumarelas was also found to have failed to act with integrity and in good faith. His licence was suspended for two months commencing July 2, 2023 and ordered to pay costs of $4,000 to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Caterina Petrolo, Paralegal (Toronto)
Ms. Petrolo was convicted of obstructing justice and breach of trust by a public officer in connection with a multi-jurisdictional probe into police corruption and a traffic ticket fixing scheme in York Region. She self-reported the charges to the Law Society and admitted her conviction. The panel found she had engaged in professional misconduct. The panel did not accept the Law Society’s argument that this called for a presumptive revocation. The panel considered the Aguirre factors and ordered the Paralegal’s licence revoked. The parties were directed to make written submissions on costs.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, Lawyer (Ottawa)
The hearing proceeded in Mr. Wansome’s absence. He was deemed to have accepted the allegations and found to have misappropriated funds he held in his trust account for his clients and withdrew funds from his trust account to pay his fees, disbursements and HST for which he had not issued invoices to his clients. The presumptive penalty in cases of misappropriation is the revocation of licence. There was no evidence of extenuating circumstances that would justify a different penalty. Mr. Wansome’s licence was revoked and he was ordered to pay the Law Society costs in the amount of $30,000.
Manmohan Singh Hans, Paralegal (Caledon)
Mr. Hans admitted the allegations through an agreed statement of facts and admitted professional misconduct. He represented a number of clients while suspended, did not provide the services promised, and was not completely truthful with the Law Society in its investigation. The panel agreed to the Law Society’s proposed ten-month suspension taking into account his discipline history and considering the principle of progressive discipline. It also ordered costs of $10,000 and restitution of three clients.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. White accepted that professional misconduct had been established based on his failure to respond to the investigative requests. He had a finding of professional misconduct for failure to co-operate in 2020. The panel found progressive discipline was called for and that nothing suggested any variation from the usual order was warranted. The panel therefore ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance, followed by a two-month suspension. It also ordered costs of $4,000 to be paid to the Law Society
- 19/05/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Davies Bagambiire, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 15, 2023.
Robert Grad, Lawyer (Vaughan)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 16, 2023.
Harvinder Singh Saran, Lawyer Applicant (Brampton)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on May 16, 2023.
Keith Stuart Shaw, Paralegal (Greely)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 17, 2023.
Monica Neeraj Goyal, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 18, 2023.
Pooja Chhikara, Lawyer Applicant (Milton)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on May 18, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Kenneth Robert Dunham, Lawyer (Nepean)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 23, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jim Koumarelas, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 24, 2023 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Ritchie James Linton, Lawyer (Brampton)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 24, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
David Charles Oake, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 24, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Danielle Shannon Harrison, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Ms. Harrison’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Caterina Petrolo, Paralegal (Toronto)
Ms. Petrolo engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a licensee by committing the criminal offences of breach of trust by a public official and attempt to obstruct justice. Her licence is revoked. Submissions on costs are invited.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Ms. Singh’s application for a paralegal licence was dismissed by the hearing panel on the basis that she was not presently of good character. The hearing panel found, among other findings, that the Ms. Singh had participated in a misleading scheme involving a loan of $200,000 to her employer, a securities dealer, which was used to show that capital to back a deal when there was none. The panel agreed with Ms. Singh’s argument that she had not been given notice that the $200,000 loan could be the basis of finding that she had participated in a misleading scheme, and that she did not have an opportunity to call evidence to show that the loan and her employer’s behaviour was in fact legitimate. The panel found that there was a breach of procedural fairness, set aside the hearing panel’s decision, and ordered that Ms. Singh’s licensing application be heard by a new hearing panel. Ms. Singh also brought a fresh evidence motion, which the panel found did not have to be addressed given its decision on the appeal. The panel invited written submissions on costs.
William Joseph Harry Bulmer, Paralegal (London)
This was the fourth failure to co-operate proceeding for Mr. Bulmer. He had notice of the hearing and the panel proceeded in his absence. The panel found that progressive discipline had had no effect on changing Mr. Bulmer’s conduct. The panel ordered the revocation of Mr. Bulmer’s licence and also awarded the Law Society’s $5,615 in costs.
David Simoes Malgueiro Campos, Lawyer (Toronto)
Following a contested capacity application, the panel turned to drafting an order, which was also hotly contested. The costs phase was also contentious and both parties asserted that they were entitled to costs and that the other party was not. The panel accepted the position of each party that costs should not be awarded in favour of the other. No costs were ordered.
Adam Christopher White, Lawyer (Keswick)
Mr. White accepted that professional misconduct had been established based on his failure to respond to the investigative requests. He had a finding of professional misconduct for failure to co-operate in 2020. The panel found progressive discipline was called for and that nothing suggested any variation from the usual order was warranted. The panel therefore ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance, followed by a two-month suspension. It also ordered costs of $4,000 to be paid to the Law Society.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Hutton was directed to bring a motion to have certain summonses issued in the context of a capacity application. The panel set out the test including that Mr. Hutton bore the onus for establishing that there was a reasonable evidentiary basis for summonsing the proposed witnesses. The panel found that Mr. Hutton’s strongly held beliefs were insufficient on their own, and so dismissed the motion.
Marie Anita Lovell, Paralegal (Scarborough)
The panel was satisfied that Ms. Lovell had received notice of the proceeding and continued in her absence. She did not respond to the request to admit. She had been suspended since a Tribunal order in 2020, following a finding of failure to co-operate. Three further investigations were started after receiving client complaints, and a fourth that she may not have complied with the 2020 order. The panel found the evidence established that Ms. Lovell failed to reply promptly and completely. The panel held that the continuing failure to respond to six separate investigations was an indication that Ms. Lovell was unwilling to be governed. It therefore found her to be ungovernable and ordered her licence to be revoked. Ms. Lovell was also ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Kenneth Robert Dunham, Lawyer (Nepean)
Mr. Dunham received many requests for information from the Law Society. He spoke with or replied on several occasions, but did not satisfy the requests for information. The requests remained outstanding by the hearing date. The panel directed that penalty and costs would be dealt with in writing to allow Mr. Dunham time to obtain medical evidence. However, his written submissions did not assist the panel. The panel found an inability to accept responsibility or to understand the effect of his misconduct on the complainants, the public or the Law Society. It therefore ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance to be followed by a one-month suspension. The panel also ordered a conditional fine if Mr. Dunham had not complied by May 30, 2023, and $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Franklyn Scott Taylor, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Taylor was alleged to have failed to serve a number of clients, failed to respond to communications from another lawyer, failed to give notice to LawPRO regarding a civil claim, and failed to co-operate with the Law Society with respect to several investigations. He did provide some responses to the allegations but did not participate in the hearing. The panel considered whether mental health might be the cause of the alleged misconduct but found that this was not established on a balance of probabilities based on the evidence available to them. The panel found that professional misconduct was established, and ordered a penalty hearing to be scheduled.
- 12/05/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
James Garnet Battin, Lawyer (Tilsonburg)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 8, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Nahid Rahimi, Paralegal (North York)
Two conduct hearings (22H-102 & 21H-159) will be held from May 15-19, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, Lawyer (London)
A conduct hearing will be held from May 15-18, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
A conduct hearing will be held from May 15-17, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Richard Keith Watson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 17, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on May 19, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Hamza Nurdin Hassan Kisaka, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 19, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
The hearing panel’s decision that Ms. Singh’s licensing application should be dismissed is set aside. A new panel will be convened to determine the results of Ms. Singh’s licensing application.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Robert Allen Stewart, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Stewart admitted that he engaged in professional misconduct by failing to serve two clients. He also failed to perform legal services to the standard of a competent paralegal and failed to take the necessary steps when he discovered an error or omission. The panel accepted the joint submission that Mr. Stewart be allowed to surrender his licence and pay costs of $1,000.
U-Sheak Koroma, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Koroma admitted that he engaged in professional misconduct. The panel accepted the joint submission of revocation and reimbursement of the Compensation Fund as being in accordance with the public interest test. The parties did not agree on costs. While the panel accepted that the Law Society’s costs were reasonable the panel also accepted that due to Mr. Koroma’s unique circumstances, no costs should be ordered.
Alexandre Papouchine, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Papouchine was declared a vexatious litigant by two human rights administrative bodies. He responded that the declarations were acts of reprisal. The panel reviewed the complaints Mr. Papouchine made to the Law Society, HRTO and CHRC, as well as his involvement in various Small Claims Court actions. The panel granted the Law Society’s motion to quash eleven summonses to witnesses in this matter. The panel concluded that Mr. Papouchine engaged in an unrelenting campaign of complaints against those who he perceived to have violated his human rights. The panel found the behaviour complained of by the HRTO and CHRC was repeated during this hearing. The panel found that Mr. Papouchine had not established that he was currently of good character and the application for a paralegal licence was dismissed.
Sam Haghparast Rad, Paralegal Applicant (Thornhill)
Mr. Rad disclosed a history of criminal convictions in the 1990s. He was convicted of smuggling drugs into Japan in 2005. He was in prison in Japan from June 2004 to December 2008 when he was transferred to Canada to complete his sentence. He was granted day parole in 2010 and while on day parole was arrested for shoplifting. In 2014 he was arrested for a parole violation for operating a business in violation of a special condition on his parole. He was incarcerated again until his statutory release in 2015. He was granted a pardon in 2021.
The panel had significant concerns about Mr. Rad’s credibility, candour and honesty. His evidence was externally inconsistent with other evidence the panel accepted and was internally inconsistent with his own evidence. The panel found him to be deceptive and manipulative, and decided that he had not proved that he currently is of good character. The application for a P1 licence was dismissed.
Samir Nagaty Ha Roman, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Mr. Roman did not respond to the allegations listed in the request to admit and was deemed to admit them. The parties provided a joint submission that Mr. Roman’s licence be revoked, which the panel accepted, as it was not “unhinged” and was in the public interest. It further accepted as fair and reasonable an order that Mr. Roman reimburse the Compensation Fund up to $15,289 if compensation funds are paid out and an order that a portion of fees repaid to two clients. The panel accepted a joint submission for a $1,000 costs order. The Law Society agreed to withdraw a second application if no appeal is made of this decision.
- 05/05/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
James Douglas Stewart Bowie, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 4, 2023.
Richard Adedayo Odeleye, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 3, 2023.
Antonio Agozzino, Lawyer (King)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 26, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Courtney Akinwale Kazembe, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 8, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Aliamisse Omar Mundulai, Lawyer Applicant (Vaughan)
An appeal by the licence applicant will be heard on May 9, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kenneth Robert Dunham, Lawyer (Nepean)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 10, 2023 at 4:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Guillermo Escobedo Hoyo, Paralegal (Ottawa)
A capacity hearing will be held on May 10, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Andrew John Sanders, Lawyer (St. Thomas)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 10 & 11, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
A S M Tofazzel Haque, Lawyer (Scarborough)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on May 12, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Sam Haghparast Rad, Paralegal Applicant (Thornhill)
Mr. Rad is not presently of good character, and so his licensing application is dismissed.
Alexandre Papouchine, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Papouchine is not presently of good character, and so his licensing application is dismissed.
Maria Frances Marusic, Lawyer (Windsor)
Ms. Marusic engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a licensee by failing to assist in preventing Mr. Martini’s unauthorised practise of law, failing to act with integrity, and misleading the Law Society about the nature of her relationship with Mr. Martini. Her licence is revoked, and she is ordered to pay $158,972.43 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Lesley Mary Taafe, Lawyer (Oshawa)
The panel earlier found that Ms. Taafe had engaged in professional misconduct including failing to serve to the standard of a competent lawyer, improperly withdrawing from representation, and behaving dishonourably and in an abusive manner in communications. The panel considered a joint submission on penalty and costs. The panel concluded that the joint submission would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute nor would it otherwise be contrary to the public interest. Ms. Taafe’s licence was suspended for six months and she was ordered to pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Thomas Michael Harris, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
The panel had earlier found that Mr. Harris engaged in professional misconduct involving failing to serve and misleading 15 clients over a period of 10 years. Mr. Harris agreed that revocation was the appropriate penalty. The panel revoked Mr. Harris’ licence based on the seriousness, extent and duration of the misconduct. Although he was facing a number of issues, Mr. Harris did not establish that his health issues were connected to the misconduct, nor did he establish any other mitigating factors. The Law Society requested reduced costs of $70,000. The panel ordered $50,000 in costs to be paid over five years based on factors including the length of the case, Mr. Harris’ agreement to an agreed statement of facts and his changed financial circumstances.
Michael Israel Rappaport, Lawyer (Ottawa)
The Law Society sought to have the findings from two judicial decisions admitted into evidence and that Mr. Rappaport not be permitted to relitigate the findings. The panel admitted the reasons and related transcripts but found that they were not dispositive of the conduct and competence issues to be determined by the panel.
Michael Israel Rappaport, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Rappaport brought an ill-founded motion while representing his client in family law proceedings that wasted costs. He also filed an affidavit by another lawyer that contained his narrative of the case. The client’s pleadings were struck one month prior to the trial date, which he then could not participate in. Mr. Rappaport was also removed as counsel because he might have to appear as a witness. Mr. Rappaport then filed a complaint against the judge and created a website to host the supporting documents including many documents from the family law proceedings. He delayed advising his client to seek independent legal advice regarding the possibility that costs would be ordered against himself personally, and twice filed affidavit evidence that implicitly waived solicitor-client privilege and made him a potential witness. Taking all this into account, the panel found that Mr. Rappaport failed to represent his client to the standard of a competent lawyer. The panel concluded that his personal attacks on the judge failed to encourage respect for the administration of justice. The panel directed that a hearing on penalty and costs be scheduled.
Azmat Raj Kumar Ramal-Shah, Lawyer (Toronto)
In an Agreed Statement of Facts, Mr. Ramal-Shah admitted that he engaged in professional misconduct by repeatedly communicating with AB, despite being asked by her counsel not to contact her directly, communicating with AB, her family and her counsel in an abusive manner and threatening criminal proceedings in relation to their civil dispute. Mr. Ramal-Shah had been in a virtual relationship with AB; during the relationship he gave her $20,000 to $30,000 because she falsely claimed to have cancer. When this was discovered, the relationship broke down and Mr. Ramal-Shah demanded the return of the money and began a civil claim, leading to the inappropriate and abusive communications. The panel found that a one-month suspension was appropriate, given Mr. Ramal-Shah’s lack of previous disciplinary history, mental health diagnosis, significant rehabilitative efforts, letters of apology and admission of professional misconduct. The parties were invited to make written submissions on the Law Society’s costs request.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
Following a complex and lengthy hearing the panel concluded that Mr. Guiste engaged in professional misconduct and dismissed his motion for a stay. The Law Society brought allegations against Mr. Guiste following two criminal trials where he acted as defence counsel for two individuals accused of domestic assault. The panel found that Mr. Guiste’s comments in court were not dignified nor restrained; he failed to treat the judge, Crown counsel and a witness with candour, fairness, courtesy and respect. He should not have made unfounded allegations based on mere suspicion, nor should he have made accusations without a good faith, reasonable basis. The panel found that Mr. Guiste failed to meet the requisite level of competence in relation to issues surrounding first- and third-party disclosure and the O’Connor process, and that he fell below the requisite standard of competence in trial preparation and execution generally. The panel found no inordinate delay and no significant prejudice. The motion to stay for delay was dismissed, and the panel directed that a penalty hearing be scheduled.
Carlos Alberto Ortiz, Paralegal (Toronto)
Georgiana Stefania Masgras-Irshidat, Lawyer (Kitchener)
Clifford Singh, Lawyer (Pickering)
The three licensees were alleged to have acted without integrity, to have knowingly misrepresented facts and failed to be candid in written representations to the Licence Appeal Tribunal. Mr. Ortiz was also alleged to have failed to be honest with the Law Society. The panel found that the allegations were not established, as there was no intentional misrepresentation by the licensees in their motion materials or communications with the Law Society. The application was dismissed, and any parties seeking costs were invited to make written submissions to the panel.
Brandon Keven Rooney, Lawyer (Stratford)
Following the panel’s decision to revoke Mr. Rooney’s licence, it accepted the parties’ joint submission on costs and ordered Mr. Rooney to pay costs of $15,000 within three years.
Robert Arthur Otto, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Otto admitted the misconduct and sought permission to surrender his licence. The panel found that he had engaged in professional misconduct as alleged and admitted. It also found him to be ungovernable and revoked his licence. The panel ordered Mr. Otto to repay $300,000 to his client, and to pay $7,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Maria Frances Marusic, Lawyer (Windsor)
The panel earlier found that Ms. Marusic had allowed a suspended licensee to meet with clients and provide legal services. The panel also found that she failed to act with integrity. Ms. Marusic did not appear at the penalty hearing. Based on the purposes of disciplinary orders and the Aguirre factors, the panel concluded that her licence should be revoked and that she pay approximately $160,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Brooklin)
Following the appeal panel’s reasons dismissing Mr. Rapoport’s appeal, the panel invited submissions on costs. Mr. Rapoport did not make submissions. The panel ordered him to pay $29,400 in costs to the Law Society.
- 28/04/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
John Zadkovich, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 25, 2023.
Danielle Shannon Harrison, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on April 21, 2023.
Robert William Hugh Kivlichan, Lawyer (St. Catharines)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 21, 2023.
Ari Benjamin Kulidjian, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 21, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Jenna Leigh Warman, Paralegal Applicant (North York)
A licensing hearing will be held on May 4 & 5, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Adam Michael Salvona, Paralegal (London)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on May 4, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jim Koumarelas, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 5, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Tracey Marie Resetar, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on May 5, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Carlos Alberto Ortiz, Paralegal (Toronto)
Georgiana Stefania Masgras-Irshidat, Lawyer (Kitchener)
Clifford Singh, Lawyer (Pickering)
The allegations against Mr. Ortiz, Ms. Masgras-Irshidat and Mr. Singh were not established. The applications are dismissed.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
The order of March 29, 2023 is stayed. Mr. Diamond will perfect his appeal within three months.
Thomas Michael Harris, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
Mr. Harris engaged in professional misconduct by failing to perform legal services to the standard of a competent lawyer and failing to be honest and candid and act with integrity and in good faith with respect of 15 of his clients. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $50,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Guillermo Escobedo Hoyo, Paralegal (Ottawa)
Mr. Hoyo is incapacitated. He may not provide legal services except as a resident of Ontario and as an employed paralegal. A variety of treatment and reporting terms are also ordered, failing which Mr. Hoyo’s licence will be suspended.
Azmat Raj Kumar Ramal-Shah, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Ramal-Shah engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by communicating and attempting to negotiate directly with AB despite repeated requests to cease all communications, communicating with AB and CD in a manner that was uncivil, offensive, discourteous, not in good faith, and otherwise inconsistent with the proper tone of professional communication, and threatening to initiate criminal charges against AB should their dispute not settle to his satisfaction. His licence is suspended for one month. Costs submissions are invited.
Heath Peter Leyrow Whiteley, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Whiteley engaged in professional misconduct by failing to meet financial obligations incurred in relation to his practice and failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. A reprimand is ordered, along with $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Brooklin)
The panel orders that Mr. Rapoport will pay $29,400 in costs to the Law Society.
Brandon Keven Rooney, Lawyer (Stratford)
The panel orders that Mr. Rooney will pay $15,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Bush had not provided complete answers until after the hearing had begun. The panel found that he engaged in professional misconduct by failing to promptly and completely respond. The panel was unable to conclude that Mr. Bush had functional limitations as a result of a disability that were required to be accommodated. The panel directed that a hearing be scheduled to consider Mr. Bush’s request that the application be converted to an invitation to attend.
Raymond Joseph Yvon Lachapelle, Lawyer (Hawkesbury)
Following a guilty plea and a criminal conviction for conspiracy to traffic cocaine, Mr. Lachapelle admitted that he engaged in conduct unbecoming a lawyer. The panel concluded that a penalty of revocation was necessary in order to communicate to the public that members of the legal profession could be trusted, and that unbecoming conduct of this nature and on this scale was not tolerated. Mr. Lachapelle’s licence was therefore revoked, and he was ordered to pay $12,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Leon Stanley Wickham, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Wickham had previously been subject to practice conditions including, among other things, a requirement that he not operate a trust account. He had a history of professional misconduct, and had previously been disbarred and later reinstated on terms and conditions, including the term regarding trust accounts. The Law Society alleged that Mr. Wickham engaged in professional misconduct by breaching these conditions, failing to deposit client funds into a supervised trust account, failing to render timely accounts, charging unreasonable fees, and acting without integrity. The panel proceeded in the absence of Mr. Wickham, who had received notice. The panel found that Mr. Wickham had engaged in professional misconduct as alleged, including charging unreasonable fees to a family law client in dire financial circumstances and taking fees without depositing them into a trust account as required. The panel revoked Mr. Wickham’s licence to practise law, which it found to be the appropriate penalty given the nature and duration of the misconduct. Costs of $14,467 to the Law Society were also ordered.
- 21/04/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
A S M Tofazzel Haque, Lawyer (Scarborough)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or restriction was filed on April 18, 2023.
Vahe Avagyan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 14, 2023.
David Peter Ginzberg, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on April 14, 2023.
Sean Leo Kevin Daley, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 14, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Guillermo Escobedo Hoyo, Paralegal (Ottawa)
A capacity hearing will be held on April 24, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within an appeal by the licensee will be heard on April 24, 2023 at 2:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Stephanie Nadia Colangelo, Paralegal Applicant (Port Colborne)
An appeal by the licence applicant will be heard on April 25, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Adam Michael Salvona, Paralegal (London)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on April 26, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, avocat (Ottawa)
M. Wansome s’est conduit d’une façon qui constitue un manquement professionnel pour détournement de fonds. Le permis de l’intimé est révoqué immédiatement. Il est également ordonné de verser au Barreau des dépens du montant de 30 000$.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Jitendra Kumar Sood, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel concluded that the Law Society did not prove the allegations it made against Mr. Sood, and so the conduct application was dismissed.
Adam Robin William Graham Tye, Paralegal Applicant (Peterborough)
Following the panel’s dismissal of Mr. Tye’s licensing application, the panel considered the issue of costs. Mr. Tye made a false representation on his application and showed no insight into the misconduct that he failed to disclose. The panel found that the application did not have a reasonable chance of succeeding. The costs sought by the Law Society were within the range of comparable good character hearings. The panel dismissed Mr. Tye’s request for costs and ordered him to pay $3,500 to the Law Society.
- 14/04/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on April 13, 2023.
Hamza Nurdin Hassan Kisaka, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 12, 2023.
Adam Michael Salvona, Paralegal (London)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on April 12, 2023.
Eric Andrew Goldberg, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of appeal of an administrative order was filed on April 12, 2023.
Michael Kohl, Lawyer (Etobicoke)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 12, 2023.
Suzanne Elizabeth Deliscar, Lawyer (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 11, 2023.
Mukesh Bhardwaj, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 7, 2023.
John Steven Wenus, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 6, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, avocat (Ottawa)
Une audience de conduite est prévue pour le 17 - 19 avril 2023 à 10 h par vidéoconférence.
Manmohan Singh Hans, Paralegal (Caledon)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 19, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Heath Peter Leyrow Whiteley, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 21, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kenneth Robert Dunham, Lawyer (Nepean)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on April 21, 2023 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Robin Anne MacLeod, Paralegal (Innisfil)
Ms. MacLeod engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. A reprimand is ordered.
Adam Robin William Graham Tye, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Tye will pay $3,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Jitendra Kumar Sood, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society’s allegations were not established, and so the application is dismissed.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Diamond will pay $40,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
John Baptist Joseph D'Souza, Paralegal (Toronto)
The panel concluded that Mr. D’Souza had been given appropriate notice of the hearing and proceeded in his absence. Mr. D’Souza, as plaintiff in a court action, caused the court registrar to note four defendants in default when he knew they intended to defend the action. The noting of default was set aside by the court and costs awarded against the plaintiffs. Mr. D’Souza also falsified a court judgment making findings of fraud in his favour. He then made a complaint against the judge whose signature he falsified. Mr. D’Souza was convicted of criminal offences related to the falsified judgment. Due to the serious nature of the professional misconduct, the panel revoked Mr. D’Souza’s licence and ordered him to pay approximately $60,000 in costs to the Law Society.
- 06/04/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Victor Wall, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 3, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Richard Keith Watson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on April 10, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
A. C., Paralegal Applicant (Brampton)
A motion within an appeal by the licensee will be heard on April 11, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Mehrdad Pashangpour, Paralegal (Newmarket)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 11 & 12, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Alec McLeod McLennan, Lawyer (Oakville)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 12 & 14, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Kenneth Robert Dunham, Lawyer (Nepean)
Mr. Dunham engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with Law Society investigations into five cases. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay a $2,500 fine if he has not co-operated by May 30, 2023. He is also ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Jane Louise Poproski, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Ms. Poproski engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with Law Society investigations. Her licence is suspended for one month, and she is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Christopher John Di Giacomo, Lawyer (Niagara Falls)
Mr. Di Giacomo had admitted to the allegations of misconduct involving 84 investor clients, 16 separate syndicates and 16 real estate projects, the result being that all of the clients lost some or all of their investments. The parties jointly proposed a one-year suspension and other terms, but the hearing panel found dishonesty and/or wilful or reckless misconduct on the part of Mr. Di Giacomo, concluded that the jointly proposed penalty could undermine public confidence in the administration of justice, and revoked Mr. Di Giacomo’s licence. On appeal, the appeal panel found that the hearing panel had imposed a penalty on the basis of allegations of dishonesty that were not alleged, which resulted in procedural unfairness, as Mr. Di Giacomo did not know the case to meet or have an opportunity to respond. It also accepted the joint submission of a one-year suspension with practice restrictions and professional development obligations, finding that it was reflective of the serious nature of the misconduct and was not unhinged from the circumstances of the case.
Gordon Roy Baker, Lawyer (Torrance)
Mr. Baker conceded that he failed to promptly and completely produce the requested books and records and bank documents. He had produced all of the requested books and records that he had but not all the books and records he was required to have. Mr. Baker suggested that he was only required to produce what he had. The panel noted that licensees are required to reconstruct required books and records that have not been maintained, and so he was suspending indefinitely pending compliance and then for one month. He was also ordered to pay $1,500 in costs.
Christopher Charles Watkins, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
Mr. Watkins suffered from multiple health and family issues. He admitted the allegations, including unknowingly overbilling LAO, acting in a conflict of interest in a criminal proceeding, failing to attend court appearances, failing to treat tribunals with courtesy, failing to properly maintain his financial records, entering into a settlement contrary to his client’s instructions, and failing to provide a complete response to the Law Society investigations. The panel accepted the joint submission as one that protected the public interest and would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute; Mr. Watkins was therefore suspended for three years, commencing October 10, 2018, and continuing indefinitely until specified conditions had been met. Terms were also imposed on his licence on his return to practising, and he was ordered to pay costs of $10,000.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel earlier rejected the parties’ joint submission and dismissed Mr. Diamond’s motion to withdraw his admission of professional misconduct. Mr. Diamond had admitted to engaging in professional misconduct in the marketing of his firm and its advertisements. The panel earlier found that it was false and deceptive to market legal services that Mr. Diamond did not in fact provide and to market himself as an expert personal injury lawyer. Due to the extraordinary circumstances of the facts in this case the panel prohibited Mr. Diamond from practising law or providing legal services for a period of three months, but he was not suspended. The panel further ordered that during that three-month period the firm’s website would prominently indicate that Mr. Diamond was currently not permitted to practice law or provide legal services. Mr. Diamond was also fined $100,000, being the maximum fine permitted under the Law Society Act.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Regan was alleged to have engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming through a wide range of unethical actions over a significant period of time, including assisting his friend and client in an attempt to avoid creditors by establishing a mortgage on his client’s property in his favour, despite knowing about a judgment against his client, and transferring shares of his client’s business and backdating the transactions. After the end of the solicitor-client relationship, Mr. Regan engaged in an ongoing campaign of threats and intimidation to force his former client to return his property and pay Mr. Regan what he believed he was owed, including ousting his former client from control of his businesses. He also communicated with his former client’s lawyer in an inappropriate fashion. He had previously been found by a court to have failed to comply with a court order for personal gain and to be in contempt, and was imprisoned as a result. He also attempted to appropriate the name of his employer law firm. After 19 hearing days, the panel found that the allegations were established, and directed that a one-day hearing be scheduled to hear submissions on penalty and costs.
- 31/03/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
There were no new notices posted this week.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Alec McLeod McLennan, Lawyer (Oakville)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 3 & 4, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Richard Keith Watson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on April 5, 2023 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Sarah Lynn Cluff, Paralegal (North Bay)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 6, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Samir Nagaty Ha Roman, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Roman engaged in professional misconduct by failing deposit client funds into a trust account, providing legal services outside the scope of a paralegal, failing to serve clients to the standard of a competent paralegal, misleading a client, misleading the Law Society, and failing to act with honour and integrity. His licence is revoked and he is ordered to pay $1,000 in costs to the Law Society, along with $1,125 to reimburse Client A and $3,500 to reimburse Client C. He is also ordered to reimburse the Compensation Fund if it makes any payments, up to $15,289.
Christopher Charles Watkins, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
Mr. Watkins engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by failing to review accounts submitted on his behalf to Legal Aid Ontario, failing to serve several clients to the standard of a competent lawyer, acting in a conflict of interest, failing to promptly provide documents requested by the Law Society,
failing to attend court dates and failing to comply with orders and arriving late in court and/or unprepared, failing to account for funds, improperly withdrawing funds from his trust account, practicing law while suspended, and failing to maintain financial records or failing to provide the financial records requested by the Law Society. His licence is suspended retroactively for three years, suspended indefinitely until a variety of conditions are met, then suspended for a year, and then indefinitely until a variety of further conditions are met. At the end of his suspensions, Mr. Watkins can only practice if he is an employee of another lawyer. He is also ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Diamond engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by marketing legal services in a manner that is likely to mislead, confuse or deceive and/or is not demonstrably true, accurate and verifiable, and/or is not in the best interests of the public and consistent with a high standard of professionalism, as well as improperly marketing on websites second opinion services. He is ordered not to practice law or provide legal services for three months, and he is ordered to pay $100,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Piero Perciballi, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Following the panel’s earlier decision that Mr. Perciballi is not currently of good character, it invited submissions on costs. Mr. Perciballi did not provide any submissions. His application had been unsuccessful, and further, the panel reasoned that there was no reasonable prospect of success. The Law Society sought costs of $10,000, which the panel found was within the range of cost awards in other good character proceedings, and so awarded it.
Gary Morton Kuchar, Lawyer (Concord)
Mr. Kuchar prepared estate documents for an individual who presented inaccurate and expired identification documents. The evidence showed that the individual could not have been his client. He also issued 48 trust cheques payable to cash, contrary to the by-laws. The Law Society investigator determined that Mr. Kuchar’s tax return and GST/HST return did not match. Mr. Kuchar refused to provide authorization allowing access to his GST/HST information. The panel found Mr. Kuchar’s conduct to be egregious, and accepted that the jointly-proposed penalty and ordered Mr. Kuchar to surrender his licence to practise law and pay costs to the Law Society of $10,000.
Neil Lawrence Boyko, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel, having found that Mr. Boyko engaged in professional misconduct, considered the parties’ submissions on penalty and costs. The panel reviewed Mr. Boyko’s discipline history and noted the similarities between prior misconduct and the misconduct found here. Further, the panel noted that Mr. Boyko did not obey Tribunal orders, and his attitude throughout displayed disrespect to his regulator. The panel found that Mr. Boyko’s failure to co-operate and his attitude towards co-operating jeopardized the public interest. The panel concluded that Mr. Boyko was ungovernable and that revocation was appropriate. It revoked Mr. Boyko’s licence, and ordered that he pay $48,405 in costs to the Law Society.
Kishore Subramanian, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Subramanian was criminally charged in relation to assaults against his spouse and breaches of undertakings not to contact her. He eventually plead guilty to one count of assault and one count of failing to comply with an undertaking. He self-reported the charges to the Law Society and participated in rehabilitative activities. The panel accepted that the penalty jointly proposed met the objective of specific and general deterrence, rehabilitation and will maintain public confidence in the professions and the Law Society’s ability to regulate. He was therefore suspended for two months and costs of $10,000 were ordered.
Kara Elane Noakes Hamilton, Lawyer (Victoria, B.C.)
Ms. Hamilton did not participate in the proceeding. Based on deemed admissions, she was found to have failed to meet her professional obligations regarding joint retainers in a property development project. She was also found to have failed to serve to the standard of a competent lawyer, to have mishandled trust funds and charged improper fees, to have falsified documents in an estates matter, and to have knowingly commissioned affidavits and registered real estate documents containing false information. The panel concluded that presumptive revocation was appropriate given misappropriation and fraudulent billing and there was no evidence of exceptional circumstances. The panel also ordered restitution of money improperly withdrawn from trust accounts for fees as well as costs of $69,623.50.
- 24/03/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Christina Tsionas-Coleman, Paralegal (Etobicoke)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 22, 2023.
Nicholas Folorunsho Owodunni, Lawyer (Tottenham)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 16, 2023.
Parminder Hundal, Lawyer (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 16, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Alec McLeod McLennan, Lawyer (Oakville)
A conduct hearing will be held from March 27-31, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kirkor Avedis Apel, Lawyer (Markham)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 30 & 31, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Neil Lawrence Boyko, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Boyko engaged in professional misconduct by failing to comply with an interlocutory suspension order, failing to comply with obligations while suspended, failing to maintain proper books and records, failing to properly handle trust funds, failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation and acting on a real estate transaction in circumstances where he ought to have known that he was being used to facilitate a fraud. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $48,405 in costs to the Law Society.
Robert Allen Stewart, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Stewart engaged in professional misconduct by failing to perform legal services to the standard of a competent paralegal and failing to take necessary steps when he discovered an error or omission. He is granted permission to surrender his licence by March 29, 2023, failing which his licence will be suspended for three months. He is also ordered to pay $1,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Piero Perciballi, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Perciballi will pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Letebrhan Beyene Nugusse, Lawyer (North York)
The panel found that Ms. Nugusse engaged in professional misconduct by failing to provide a compliance report, failing to pay costs regarding a previous suspension and failing to respond to the Law Society. She had been subject to a previous finding of professional misconduct regarding failure to respond to the Law Society. Ms. Nugusse did not respond or participate in this proceeding and there was no evidence that disability was a factor in her non-compliance. The panel ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance with obligations, a two-month suspension to follow, and a conditional and fixed fine. Costs of $4,000 were also ordered.
Dion Radcliffe McClean, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. McClean was found to have failed to respond to the Law Society in its investigation of four complaints of misconduct, including failing to provide information or responding to his client in a family law matter, practicing while suspended, delay in filing an application for a client and failure to complete a required compliance report. He did not participate in the hearing although he had received notice. Mr. McClean had a significant discipline history, including a previous reprimand and suspension related to diverting fees to himself, failure to serve his client and practicing while suspended. He had repeatedly failed to co-operate with the Law Society. The panel found no evidence of mitigating factors, and so it found him to be ungovernable and revoked his licence. As requested by the Law Society, costs of $10,637.50 were ordered, as the panel found the amount reasonable and in line with other similar cases.
- 16/03/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Christos Vinsentzatos, Lawyer (London)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 13, 2023.
Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Coe Hill)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 10, 2023.
Francesco Salvatore Bernard Alfano, Paralegal (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 10, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Samir Nagaty Ha Roman, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Two conduct hearings (20H-093 & 22H-003) will be held on March 22 &23, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Robert Allen Stewart, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 22, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Winfield Edward Corcoran, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on March 23, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Tracey Marie Resetar, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on March 24, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kirkor Avedis Apel, Lawyer (Markham)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 24, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Marilou Nejal, Lawyer (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 24, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Richard Keith Watson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on March 1, 2023 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
No new orders were posted this week.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Lindsay Michelle Belovari, Paralegal (Kitchener)
Ms. Belovari did not attend the hearing and the panel was satisfied that she had been served in a timely and adequate manner, and so the hearing proceeded in her absence. Ms. Belovari also did not respond to the request to admit and so was deemed to have accepted the facts as set out: she had defrauded three clients and was arrested and charged. Ms. Belovari pled guilty to one count of fraud and had received a suspended sentence, ordered to counselling and 40 hours of community service. The panel found her conduct amounted to professional misconduct and ordered the revocation of her licence, as well as $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Patrick Glemaud, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society initiated an investigation regarding Mr. Glemaud’s involvement in a cryptocurrency transaction in his personal capacity, which resulted in an allegation of failure to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. Mr. Glemaud admitted delay but claimed that he was unable to respond as a result of COVID-19, and brought a motion to convert the application into an Invitation to Attend (ITA). The panel rejected his arguments, holding that his illness explained some delay but did not explain his lack of response after he resumed practice in April 2022, nor not responding to the NOA until more than 14 days had passed. The panel found professional misconduct and denied Mr. Glemaud’s request for conversion to an ITA. Because Mr. Glemaud had responded fully by the time of the hearing, the usual penalty of a reprimand was imposed, as well as costs of $3,500.
Abtisam A. Muslim, Paralegal (Thunder Bay)
At the first hearing date, an adjournment was granted on terms. Ms. Muslim did not comply with the terms. She attended the second hearing date 18 days later, but could not hear or make herself heard. The panel found there was no basis on which to find that Ms. Muslim was unable to participate, and there was no explanation for her failure to comply with the term or to contact duty counsel, Law Society counsel or the Tribunal for 18 days. Her second request for an adjournment was denied.
The Law Society began investigating three complaints in 2019. While Ms. Muslim initially engaged with the investigator, responses remained outstanding. The panel ordered Ms. Muslim’s licence suspended indefinitely, pending compliance with the requests and then for two months, as well as $3,500 in costs.
Girolamo Falletta, Lawyer (Hamilton)
After reviewing the evidence regarding Mr. Falletta’s handling of his trust account, the panel concluded that his use of his trust account exposed the people who deposited money with him to significant risk. None of the funds had been returned to the trust account, which amounted to a breach of the terms of agreement. Neither did Mr. Falletta take steps to ascertain the status of the funds or do any due diligence either on his clients or on any of the parties to the deposit transactions. Mr. Falletta did not provide any legal services or advice in any of the four transactions. The panel found that the evidence indicated that he may have been using his trust account for purposes unrelated to his legal practice in contravention of the By-Laws. The panel concluded that an order suspending his practice was required to maintain public confidence in the administration of justice. Mr. Falletta was suspended on an interlocutory basis.
- 10/03/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Vincenzo Piruzza, Paralegal (Windsor)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 7, 2023.
Kenneth Robert Dunham, Lawyer (Nepean)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 7, 2023.
Glenroy Kendal Bastien, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 6, 2023.
Ari Benjamin Kulidjian, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 3, 2023.
Stuart Morley Law, Lawyer (Oakville)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 3, 2023.
David Timothy Starr, Lawyer (Guelph)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 3, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Stuart Cameron Murray, Lawyer (Port Stanley)
A motion within an appeal by the licensee will be heard on March 16, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Tracey Marie Resetar, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on March 17, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Patrick Glemaud, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Glemaud engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. A reprimand is ordered, along with $3,500 in costs to the Law Society.
David Simoes Malgueiro Campos, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Campos is incapacitated. His licence is suspended until he has complied with a variety of treatment and reporting terms. He is also ordered to comply with a variety of treatment and reporting terms after the end of his suspension.
Letebrhan Beyene Nugusse, Lawyer (North York)
Ms. Nugusse engaged in professional misconduct by failing to file a compliance report, failing to respond promptly and completely to Law Society communications, and failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. Her licence is suspended until she has fully co-operated, and for two months after that. She is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine, and a further $2,000 fine if she has not co-operated by March 24, 2023. She is also ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Abraham Barry Davis, Lawyer (Barrie)
Following the panel’s decision to revoke Mr. Davis’s licence, the parties made submissions on costs. This was a complex matter that required three days of hearing and involved a significant number of documents and a number of accounting issues as well as expert evidence. The panel ordered Mr. Davis to pay $57,168.75 in costs.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society had previously obtained an order for an examination of Mr. Hutton by a forensic psychiatrist. Mr. Hutton had been involved in litigation on his own behalf regarding claims that others had been spying on him or attempting to recruit him as a spy. The Federal Court made a number of rulings finding that he had been engaging in proceedings that were vexatious, harassing and amounting to an abuse of process. There was evidence that Mr. Hutton had performed his duties on behalf of clients in a competent manner, but also evidence that his employer had terminated him because of erratic behaviour and deficiencies in his file work. The medical expert provided a diagnosis of a serious mental health condition and an opinion that because of his mental illness, Mr. Hutton was incapable of meeting his obligations as a licensee. The panel found that Mr. Hutton is incapacitated, and will set hearing dates to consider making a capacity order and an order as to costs.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Barnwell participated in several transactions including one where the panel found that he ought to have known he was assisting a dishonest transaction, and another where the panel found that he did know he was assisting a dishonest transaction. The panel found Mr. Barnwell’s assertions as to his beliefs at the time of the transactions to be not credible, as a result of correspondence was sending at the time, including texts to his client. The panel concluded that Mr. Barnwell ignored numerous red flags and acted contrary to his obligations as escrow agent. The panel also concluded that the documents clearly showed that Mr. Barnwell had an overdrawn trust account. The panel directed the Tribunal Office to canvass dates for a penalty hearing.
David Simoes Malgueiro Campos, Lawyer (Toronto)
In a previous decision, the panel found that Mr. Campos was incapacitated, but could be capable of practising if he abstained from alcohol and drug use and complied with continuing treatment and monitoring. The panel further convened a case conference to hear submissions on the contested details of their order and issued supplementary reasons. The panel requested further written submissions on two terms of the complex order regarding the expiry of the order and the authority of the addiction medicine physician to order unannounced drug testing. The panel provided exact language regarding these terms of the capacity order. A costs order will be provided after the parties provide written submissions on this issue.
Sheila Joy Stanislawski, Lawyer (Nepean)
The Hearing Division had found that Ms. Stanislawski had engaged in serious professional misconduct/conduct unbecoming in relation to misappropriation of money from her employer. It revoked her licence and awarded costs of $125,000. Ms. Stanislawski appealed, but failed to perfect her appeal by the deadline, and the Tribunal deemed it to be withdrawn. The Appeal Division panel found that, despite Ms. Stanislawski’s intention to appeal, and the fact that the delay was not extremely long, the lack of merit in the appeal and justice of the case were determinative. The panel found that the various grounds of appeal raised by Ms. Stanislawski did not have any real prospect of success, including her arguments related to the standard of proof applied by the Hearing Division, a failed abuse of process motion, claimed errors in the order for costs and the justice of the case. The panel requested that submissions be made by the parties.
- 03/03/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Richard Desmond Jackman, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 27, 2023.
A. C., Paralegal Applicant (Brampton)
A notice of appeal by the licence applicant was filed on February 13, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Caterina Petrolo, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 7, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Deborah Anne Humphreys, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
An appeal by the Law Society will be heard on March 7, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Tracey Marie Resetar, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on March 10, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on March 10, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Mimi Tang, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Tang engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. Her licence is suspended until she has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and she is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Abraham Barry Davis, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Davis engaged in professional misconduct by knowingly assisting in dishonest or illegal conduct, receiving cash from one client and applying it to two client files, failing to maintain proper books and records, failing to act with honour and integrity, and giving financial rewards to a non-licensee for the referral of clients or client matters. His licence is revoked.
Abraham Barry Davis, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Davis will pay $57,168.75 in costs to the Law Society.
Kishore Subramanian, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Subramanian engaged in conduct unbecoming by pleading guilty to two criminal offences. His licence is suspended for two months, and he is ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Christopher John Di Giacomo, Lawyer (Niagara Falls)
Regarding Mr. Di Giacomo’s appeal, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the March 3, 2022 order are set aside. His licence is suspended for one year, starting March 3, 2022, following which it will be restricted. He is also ordered to complete 10 additional CPD hours.
Raymond Joseph Yvon Lachapelle, Lawyer (Hawkesbury)
La Formation a conclu que Me Lachapelle s’est conduit d’une façon qui est indigne d’un titulaire de permis. Son permis est révoqué, avec effet immédiat. Il doit verser au Barreau de l’Ontario des dépens du montant de 12 000$.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Lisa Elizabeth Simone, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Ms. Simone provided an amendment to her application regarding a previous professional discipline investigation which she had failed to previously disclose. The Law Society also anonymously received copies of social media posts that the applicant had made in 2020, which included disparaging and inflammatory comments about the Black Lives Matter movement, Pride Day and public health mask mandates. The Law Society initiated two separate investigations regarding these incidents. The matter was referred for a good character hearing under s. 27(4) of the Act. The panel found that Ms. Simone had established current good character because although these incidents were concerning, it found that the professional discipline incident was over 10 years ago during a period of difficulty for Ms. Simone, the social media posts were made over a relatively short period of time in 2020, no further incidents of concern regarding good character had occurred since then, Ms. Simone acknowledged the concerning nature of this conduct, and she had sought out various forms of professional and other support. The concurring panellist agreed that the licence applicant had established her current good character, but found that the incidents involving the previous regulator were 10 years in the past and had been acknowledged by the applicant, and further, that the social media posts did not constitute misconduct and that licensees should not take this case to suggest that they remain silent on the issues of the day. Neither party sought costs and none were ordered.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel concluded that fairness had not been compromised nor were the proceedings unfair or oppressive to the point that they were contrary to the interests of justice. The harm to the public interest if the application was halted required that the proceeding be determined on its merits. Mr. Barnwell’s motion to stay the proceeding was therefore dismissed.
Barry Stephen Bien, Lawyer (Amherstview)
Mr. Bien was alleged to have engaged in professional misconduct, including failing to serve three clients in family law matters, misleading his client, failure to comply with two court orders, acting in a conflict of interest with his client, and practising law while suspended. He had participated in some stages of the proceeding and requested multiple adjournments but did not provide requested medical evidence to establish need for further adjournment. There had been a long case management history and a range of accommodations, and additional time had been provided over the years. Mr. Bien was deemed to admit the truth of the facts in the RTA. The panel found that there was no evidence of mitigating factors and there was insufficient medical evidence to provide an explanation for his conduct. Mr. Bien was therefore found to be ungovernable and his licence was revoked because of his discipline history, history of failing to respond promptly and completely to the Law Society, and the serious misconduct found and its impact on his clients. The panel also ordered costs of $20,000—less than half of the actual costs.
- 24/02/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 23, 2023.
Sarah Lynn Cluff, Paralegal (North Bay)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 21, 2023.
Robin Anne MacLeod, Paralegal (Innisfil)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 21, 2023.
Milica Birkett, Paralegal Applicant (Oshawa)
A notice of appeal by the Law Society was filed on February 21, 2023.
Dunstan Dan Senjule, Lawyer Applicant (Beaverton)
A notice of appeal by the licence applicant was filed on February 21, 2023.
Hermie Yaba Abraham, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 16, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Kishore Subramanian, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 27, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Tracey Marie Resetar, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on March 3, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Adam Christopher White, Lawyer (Keswick)
Mr. White engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with four Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for two months after that, and he is ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Mimi Tang, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Tang engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. Her licence is suspended until she has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and she is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
John D’Souza, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. D’Souza engaged in conduct unbecoming by engaging in sharp practice and by being found guilty of criminal offences. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $59,937.50 in costs to the Law Society.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. David engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with four Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for six months after that. If he has not co-operated by March 21, 2023, he is ordered to pay a $10,000 fine. He is also ordered to pay $16,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Paulos Luizos, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel found that Mr. Luizos engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond to the Law Society and failing to comply with reporting requirements of his previous undertaking not to practise. He had also been subject to a number of previous findings of professional misconduct. Mr. Luizos did not respond or participate in this proceeding but there was evidence from previous proceedings that he faced a number of challenges involving mental and physical health as well as difficult family circumstances. Panels in previous proceedings had provided various opportunities to continue practising law and accommodation of his disability. The Law Society sought a penalty of revocation which the panel ordered based on principles of progressive discipline and a lack of evidence that Mr. Luizos would be able to change course and comply with his regulatory obligations. The panel found that there was insufficient evidence of to show that he was unable to respond based on disability, and so Mr. Luizos’ licence was revoked and costs of $7,456 were ordered.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. David did not respond to several Law Society investigations. He had an honest, but mistaken, belief that he did not have to respond because the investigations were conducted for an improper purpose. Mr. David submitted that if the panel found that he was required to respond then he would do so. Mr. David had been suspended in 2020 and 2021 for failing to co-operate with investigations. The Law Society sought revocation arguing Mr. David was ungovernable. The panel was not persuaded that Mr. David was unwilling or unable to be governed by the Law Society. It instead suspended him indefinitely pending compliance and then for a further six months. The panel ordered a fine of $10,000 if he had not complied by March 31, 2023, along with costs of $16,000.
- 17/02/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Vishal Pravinkumar Chotai, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 10, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Maria Frances Marusic, Lawyer (Windsor)
Two conduct hearings (19H-084 & 17H-153) will be held on February 21, 2023 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
John Baptist Joseph D'Souza, Paralegal (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings (21H-107 & PCN39-15) will be held on February 22, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Raymond Joseph Yvon Lachapelle, avocat (Hawkesbury)
Une audience de conduite est prévue pour le 24 fevrier 2023 à 10 h par vidéoconférence.
Kenneth Robert Dunham, Lawyer (Nepean)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on February 24, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Letebrhan Beyene Nugusse, Lawyer (North York)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on February 24, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Dion Radcliffe McClean, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. McClean engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation and failing to complete a compliance report, and failing to respond to communications from Regulatory Compliance. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $10,637.50 in costs to the Law Society.
Paulos Luizos, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Luizos engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by failing to comply with an undertaking, and failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $7,456 in costs to the Law Society.
Deborah Lee Hamilton, Paralegal (Hamilton)
Ms. Hamilton engaged in professional misconduct by acting in a conflict of interest, failing to perform legal services to the standard of a competent paralegal, acting outside the scope of her practice and failing to maintain the confidentiality and safeguard the property of her clients. Her licence is suspended for three months, and she is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Gary Morton Kuchar, Lawyer (Concord)
Mr. Kuchar engaged in professional misconduct by knowingly assisting in and/or failing to prevent fraud or illegal conduct, failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation, and by making 48 trust cheques totalling $124,557.17 payable to cash. He is ordered to surrender his licence, along with $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Ronald James Walker, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Walker was found to have practised law while suspended. He had been suspended since 2017 but in 2019 met with clients and carried out a number of activities that were found by the panel to involve practising law. The panel ordered a two-month suspension to follow any current or pending suspensions, a fixed fine of $2,000 and costs of $3,079.50 as requested by the Law Society.
Mark Stansfield Trenholme, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Trenholme had been found to have engaged in professional misconduct in relation to failure to serve a family law client to the standard of a competent lawyer. Based on the purposes of disciplinary orders and the Aguirre factors, the panel found that the two-month suspension requested by the Law Society was appropriate and in line with other similar cases. Mr. Trenholme did not provide evidence or submissions on the length of the suspension or any mitigating factors or costs. The panel ordered costs in the amount of $20,000, as Mr. Trenholme did not take steps such as providing an agreed statement of facts, which would have reduced the hearing time needed.
Deborah Lee Hamilton, Paralegal (Hamilton)
In the context of business agreements between two clients, and based on an agreed statement of facts, Ms. Hamilton was found to have engaged in professional misconduct including acting in a conflict of interest, failing to perform legal services to the standard of a competent paralegal, acting outside her scope of practice and failing to maintain confidentiality of her clients. The joint submission on penalty and costs was found by the panel to be reasonable and within the same range as comparable cases. Although there was no previous discipline record and Ms. Hamilton was co-operative with the investigation, the misconduct was in the context of practising outside the permitted scope of practice and had a severe impact on her clients, resulting in losses of over $500,000. The panel imposed a three-month suspension and ordered $5,000 in costs.
- 10/02/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Richard Keith Watson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 6, 2023.
Kanwar Baljit Singh Malhi, Lawyer Applicant (Brampton)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on February 3, 2023.
Peter John Craniotis, Lawyer (Oakville)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 2, 2023.
Anantika Tokas, Lawyer Applicant (Kitchener)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on February 2, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Michael Hassard, Lawyer Applicant (Burlington)
A licensing hearing will be held from February 13-15, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Tracey Marie Resetar, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on February 17, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Adam Christopher White, Lawyer (Keswick)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 17, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
U-Sheak Koroma, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Koroma engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating money and misleading or attempting to mislead his client, and failing to respond to a Law Society investigation. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $9,277.14 to the Compensation Fund.
Veronica Joyce McAlea Ceponis, Lawyer (Sarnia)
Ms. Ceponis engaged in professional misconduct by failing to serve a client to the standard of a competent lawyer, transferring trust money without delivering a bill and twice failing to conduct herself with honour and integrity. Her licence is suspended for two months, and she is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Lesley Mary Taafe, Lawyer (Oshawa)
Ms. Taafe engaged in professional misconduct by withdrawing from representation without good cause or reasonable notice, twice failing to maintain the integrity of the profession, failing to serve three clients to the standard of a competent lawyer, acting in a conflict of interest, twice failing to respond to opposing counsel with reasonable promptness, and behaving dishonourably, abusively and unprofessionally. Her licence is suspended for six months, and she is ordered to pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Abtisam A. Muslim, Paralegal (Thunder Bay)
Mr. Muslim engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for two months after that, and he is ordered to pay $3,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Ronauld Gordon Walton, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Walton engaged in conduct unbecoming. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $13,809 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Baheerathy Sriskandakumar, Lawyer Applicant (Markham)
Ms. Sriskandakumar applied to be licensed but the panel found that she had not met her burden of showing she is presently of good character and invited submissions on costs. The panel noted that such applications generate costs that have to be covered and that Ms. Sriskandakumar was unsuccessful. The parties made a joint submission for costs of $7,500 and the panel found that this amount was reasonable and comparable to other similar cases. Ms. Sriskandakumar was therefore ordered to pay costs of $7,500 to the Law Society.
Monika Tomaszewska, Paralegal (Etobicoke)
Two adjournment requests were denied. The panel accepted Ms. Tomaszwska’s e-mail correspondence as written submissions. The panel noted that Ms. Tomaszwska was not co-operating in three investigations despite numerous extensions. She had a previous disciplinary suspension for non-co-operation. Ms. Tomaszwska claimed she was unable to comply but provided insufficient medical evidence in support. She attempted to surrender her licence, but it was not accepted as there were outstanding investigations. She also refused to sign an undertaking to stop providing legal services. The panel found that the public would be at risk if Ms. Tomaszwska continued to provide legal services without restriction. The panel noted the underlying allegations were serious. Ms. Tomaszwska’s licence was suspended on an interlocutory basis.
A publication ban was ordered on all documents and e-mails from Ms. Tomaszwska or her doctors if they contain specific information regarding her health. The panel assigned to the hearing on the merits of any future proceedings will make the final determination regarding these documents.
Stephen George Reynolds, Lawyer (Ottawa)
The panel was satisfied that Mr. Reynolds had notice of the proceedings. The panel found that the Law Society Investigator was initially able to contact Mr. Reynolds using the information he had on file with the Law Society. From January 2022 however, at least some of the information on file was no longer current, including his business address and personal telephone number. The panel also found that Mr. Reynolds did not respond to investigatory requests after January 2022. Mr. Reynolds had a disciplinary history and was currently subject to an administrative suspension. The panel suspended Mr. Reynolds indefinitely pending compliance and then for a further four months. He was fined $2,000 immediately and a conditional fine was also imposed if compliance was not obtained by January 2023. The panel also ordered $2,737 in costs to the Law Society.
Paul Brian Fox, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Fox had no written retainer agreement with his client and he accepted retainer funds in cash. Mr. Fox did not deposit the funds into his trust account. He had no disciplinary history and co-operated with the Law Society, as well as expressing remorse and accepting responsibility. He corrected his books and records and remitted the taxes owing to the CRA. The panel found that the jointly submitted penalty met the public interest test. Mr. Fox was reprimanded and ordered to participate in a spot audit. The panel also ordered $6,000 in costs.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Brooklin)
The appeal panel found that there was no basis for interfering with any of the hearing panel’s findings of facts on any of the grounds of appeal brought by Mr. Rapoport. The appeal panel found no basis for interfering with the hearing panel’s assessment of witness credibility. The hearing panel had to determine whether Mr. Rapoport had committed professional misconduct; this is different than contesting Mr. Rapoport’s accounts through the assessment process. The appeal panel noted that the hearing panel’s reasons made clear that it understood the arguments and considered the applicable legal principles. The appeal panel did not conclude that the penalty was clearly unfit or that the hearing panel made any error in principle in its penalty decision, reasoning that the hearing panel’s decision on costs was not an unreasonable exercise of its discretion. The appeal was dismissed in its entirety and a timeline set for submissions on costs, if any.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, Lawyer (London)
Mr. Hamza moved for the Chair to recuse himself because of bias, and for certain of his materials to be published. The panel found that he had not shown a reasonable apprehension of bias and that he was requesting publication of materials that are not published by the Tribunal in any event. The motion was dismissed.
A.C., Paralegal (Brampton)
A.C. had been found not to be of good character in a previous decision and the Law Society requested costs. He had been convicted of criminal offences relating to assaulting his family members. The panel ordered costs of $3,000 based on the following factors: it found that his application did not have a reasonable prospect of succeeding; he co-operated in the proceeding; the Law Society asked for a reduced amount of fees; A.C. did not provide sufficient evidence of and did not establish his claimed inability to pay these costs.
- 03/02/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
There were no new notices posted this week.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
U-Sheak Koroma, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 6, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Dion Radcliffe McClean, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 6, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on February 6, 2023 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
Christopher John Di Giacomo, Lawyer (Niagara Falls)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on February 7, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Azmat Raj Kumar Ramal-Shah, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 7, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 7, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Patrick Joseph Mazurek, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Mazurek engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Victor Alexander McHady, Paralegal (Rockwood)
Mr. McHady engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that. He is ordered to pay a fine of $2,000, a further fine of $2,000 if he has not co-operated by February 27, 2023, and he is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Baheerathy Sriskandakumar, Lawyer Applicant (Markham)
The panel orders that Mr. Sriskandakumar will pay $7,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Brooklin)
Mr. Rapoport’s appeal is dismissed.
Leon Wickham, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Wickham engaged in professional misconduct by failing to comply with his readmission order, failing to deposit trust monies, failing to provide statements of account, charging fees that were not fair, reasonable or disclosed in a timely fashion, attempting to secure for himself almost all of an equalization payment awarded to his client, and failing to act honourably and with integrity. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $14,467 in costs to the Law Society.
Lorne Alex Farovitch, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Farovitch engaged in professional misconduct by failing to serve two clients to the standard of a competent lawyer and failing to be honest and candid when advising two clients. His licence is suspended for three months, and he is ordered to pay $5,805 in costs to the Law Society.
Joseph Jalal Kanoni, Paralegal (Cambridge)
Mr. Kanoni engaged in professional misconduct by failing to serve his client to the standard of a competent paralegal, failing to deposit trust monies, failing to preserve and account for client property, misappropriating approximately $3,254.47, failing to conduct himself with integrity and civility and marketing legal services without identifying himself as a paralegal. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Yuce Baykara, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Baykara engaged in professional misconduct. He was invited to attend for the purpose of receiving advice.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Milica Birkett, Paralegal Applicant (Oshawa)
MAJORITY – Ms. Birkett made an application for a P1 licence, which was opposed by the Law Society based on integrity concerns relating to her actions at the end of her paralegal placement. Ms. Birkett had attempted to log in to her placement host’s computer from her home and was not candid when asked about this by representatives from her college, raising integrity concerns. The majority found that this conduct was not extremely serious and had been isolated to one period of time, there had been no other incidents of concern since this incident, and she did show remorse and made efforts at rehabilitation, even though the evidence on these factors was limited and mixed. The majority found that she had established that she is presently of good character and no costs were ordered.
DISSENT – The dissent found that the concerning conduct did not consist of a single incident, but rather included multiple incidents where Ms. Birkett acted inappropriately or lied about her actions. It found that there was insufficient evidence to show genuine remorse or insight into the conduct, and that there were insufficient relevant rehabilitative efforts on her part. It found that she had not established that she is currently of good character, though it agreed that there should be no costs order.
Dunstan Dan Senjule, Lawyer Applicant (Newmarket)
Mr. Senjule’s licence was revoked in 2010 after a panel found that he had engaged in several serious forms of professional misconduct including knowing assistance in fraudulent or dishonest conduct. The past misconduct was very serious, affected a large number of clients and others, involved a great deal of money and spanned about three years. The panel felt Mr. Senjule’s remorse was qualified in that he attempted to minimize his conduct and maintained that he was ill and unable to provide the correct information during the earlier hearing that resulted in his revocation. Mr. Senjule had not apologized or expressed regret to any clients. The panel found little concrete evidence regarding rehabilitation or his conduct since the misconduct. Additionally, Mr. Senjule’s conduct during the licensing process was problematic. The application for licensing was dismissed and the panel set a timetable for cost submissions, if any.
Jonathan Shulman, Lawyer (North York)
While Mr. Shulman had participated sporadically throughout the investigation and hearing processes he did not attend a final case conference or the hearing itself and did not advise that he would be unable to attend. Mr. Shulman provided incomplete evidence about his health and its impact on his ability to respond to the investigation or the hearing. The panel concluded that it had no basis on which to adjourn the hearing further.
The panel noted that the Law Society had granted numerous extensions during its investigations. Mr. Shulman failed to provide prompt or complete responses to the investigations. The panel also found that Mr. Shulman had appeared before a judge after he was administratively suspended for failing to file his Annual Report on time, thus practicing while suspended. The panel suspended Mr. Shulman on an indefinite basis pending compliance with the investigatory requests and then for two months. The panel also ordered that he pay $6,244 in costs to the Law Society.
Abraham Barry Davis, Lawyer (Barrie)
The majority of the panel earlier found that Mr. Davis had engaged in professional misconduct for receiving money in cash where it was likely that the cash was the proceeds of crime. The panel found Mr. Davis to be a knowing participant in money laundering. The presumption of revocation in cases involving proven dishonesty is only to be displaced where there are exceptional circumstances, and since Mr. Davis did not show exceptional circumstances, the panel revoked his licence and set a schedule for receiving cost submissions.
Brandon Keven Rooney, Lawyer (Stratford)
Mr. Rooney was criminally charged and pled guilty to offences relating to child pornography. The Law Society sought a determination that revocation was the presumptive penalty for a licensee convicted of possessing child pornography, or at least the revocation of Mr. Rooney’s licence. The panel revoked Mr. Rooney’s licence, though it declined to adopt a presumptive revocation framework and applied the Aguirre factors in an individualized assessment of penalty. It found that the conduct was ongoing and very serious in nature, that while Mr. Rooney had also been a victim of online abuse as a child, this did not fully explain his conduct or establish how this would impact his rehabilitation, and that although he was co-operative, showed remorse and took active rehabilitative steps, this did not fully establish that it was sufficient to protect the public or show that he was effectively rehabilitated.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, Lawyer (London)
Mr. Hamza failed to co-operate with Law Society investigations. Although invited to provide submissions on penalty, he did not. Mr. Hamza’s licence was suspended indefinitely, followed by an additional period of one month. He was also ordered to pay costs in the amount of $14,000.
James Douglas Stewart Bowie, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Bowie acknowledged that he did not provide complete responses to the Law Society’s inquiries. He had no prior professional discipline and apologized and expressed remorse. The panel accepted the joint submission, and Mr. Bowie was suspended indefinitely pending compliance and then for one month. He was also ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
- 01/27/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Omar Mohamoud Mohamed, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 25, 2023.
Letebrhan Beyene Nugusse, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 23, 2023.
Ruth-Anne Dawn Avruskin, Lawyer (Orangeville)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on January 19, 2023.
Jane Louise Poproski, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 19, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Leon Stanley Wickham, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A conduct hearing will be held from January 30-February 3, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Joseph Jalal Kanoni, Paralegal (Cambridge)
A conduct hearing will be held on January 31, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Abtisam A. Muslim, Paralegal (Thunder Bay)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on January 31, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ronauld Gordon Walton, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 1, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Lorne Alex Farovitch, Lawyer (Montreal, Q.C.)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 1, 2023 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
Lesley Mary Taafe, Lawyer (Oshawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 2, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Veronica Joyce McAlea Ceponis, Lawyer (Sarnia)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 3, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Brandon Keven Rooney, Lawyer (Stratford)
Mr. Rooney engaged in conduct unbecoming by pleading guilty to charges relating to child pornography. His licence is revoked. Submissions are invited regarding costs.
Dunstan Dan Senjule, Lawyer Applicant (Newmarket)
Mr. Senjule is not presently of good character, and so his licensing application is dismissed.
Milica Birkett, Paralegal Applicant (Oshawa)
Ms. Birkett is presently of good character, and is eligible for a P1 licence.
Lindsay Michelle Belovari, Paralegal (Kitchener)
Ms. Belovari engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain the integrity of the profession, being dishonest and acting without integrity, holding herself out as a person entitled to provide legal services, and failing to report to the Law Society as soon as was reasonably practicable that she had been charged with Criminal Code offenses. Her licence is revoked and she is ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Ronald James Walker, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Walker engaged in professional misconduct by practicing law while his licence was suspended. His licence is suspended for two months and he is ordered to pay a fine of $2,000 and $3,079.50 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Jonathan Shulman, Lawyer (North York)
The Law Society brought a motion for interlocutory suspension. Mr. Shulman was involved in 12 ongoing investigations regarding conduct and one involving capacity. The conduct investigations involved allegations such as failing to complete work on files or to respond to his clients, practising while suspended, unauthorized use of his client’s credit card and failure to co-operate with or respond to the Law Society. The capacity issues arose from medical evidence indicating that he had serious health issues that might impact his ability to practise law. The panel granted the motion for an interlocutory suspension based on evidence that there were reasonable grounds to believe there was a serious risk of harm to the public and to the public interest in the administration of justice.
David Simoes Malgueiro Campos, Lawyer (Toronto)
In a previous decision, the panel found that the respondent was incapacitated, but could be capable of practising if he abstained from alcohol and drug use and complied with continuing treatment and monitoring. The panel convened a case conference to hear submissions on the contested details of their order. The panel ordered that the Executive Director of the Law Society would have the authority to approve the addiction management physician, that details of third-party unannounced testing would be left up to the addiction management physician and that the order would commence upon the respondent’s return to practice and would continue for three years. Each party sought costs and were asked to provide written submissions on this issue.
- 20/01/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Kenneth Robert Dunham, Lawyer (Nepean)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 18, 2023.
Mark Wade Smith, Lawyer (Kanata)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 16, 2023.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 13, 2023.
Adelin-Bogdan Mocanu, Lawyer (Concord)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 11, 2023.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Courtney Akinwale Kazembe, Lawyer (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on January 23, 24 & 27, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Peel)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on January 26, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Adam Christopher White, Lawyer (Keswick)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on January 27, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Robert Arthur Otto, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Otto engaged in professional misconduct by failing to serve two clients to the standard of a competent lawyer and failing to be honest and candid when advising two clients, failing to deliver billings to two clients, failing to give notice to his insurer of two potential claims, failing to immediately deposit $7,400 into his trust account, acting in a conflict of interest, and failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $300,000 to a client and $7,500 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Richard Craig Anthony Patterson, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Patterson brought a novel argument, which supported equality rights, to the request for disclosure of the PAC memo. The factual aspects of the motion claimed there was circumstantial evidence that anti-Black racial stereotypes were relied upon. The Law Society was obliged to respond to those matters, which increased the complexity of the motion. The panel accepted there was a public interest component to the motion. However, Mr. Patterson’s motion was completely unsuccessful. The panel concluded that costs should be ordered now and reduced the amount sought by the Law Society from approximately $16,000 to $8,000.
- 13/01/2023
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
James Douglas Skinner, Lawyer (London)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 10, 2023.
Jane Louise Poproski, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 9, 2023.
Chantel Dorothy Twizell, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 6, 2023.
Rhonda Fleming, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding capacity was filed on January 6, 2023.
Gary John McCallum, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 6, 2023.
Steven Russell Michael, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 5, 2023.
Adam Robin William Graham Tye, Paralegal Applicant (Peterborough)
A notice of appeal by the licence applicant was filed on December 29, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Armenak Martin Dumanian, Lawyer Applicant (Oakville)
A licensing hearing will be held from January 16-18, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Alexandre Papouchine, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held from January 16-18, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Tracey Marie Resetar, Lawyer (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on January 17, 2023 at 1:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Lindsay Michelle Belovari, Paralegal (Kitchener)
A conduct hearing will be held on January 20, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Myles Frederick McLellan, Lawyer Applicant (Sault Ste. Marie)
A licensing hearing will be held from January 20, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Girolamo Falletta, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Falletta’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Robert Angus Lewis, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Lewis engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Martin Christopher Schulz, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Schulz’s request for costs is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Robson appealed from the Hearing Division decision that suspended him indefinitely pending compliance and then for a further six months for failing to co-operate with the Law Society. He also brought a motion for fresh evidence, which was dismissed because the panel found that it failed to meet the criteria set out in Fuhgeh for accepting fresh evidence on appeal. There was no explanation as to why the evidence was not provided earlier. The panel also found that the evidence did not bear on any decisive issue in the appeal and thus could not have reasonably affected the result.
The appeal panel affirmed Tribunal jurisprudence that the Housen standard of review applies to appeals from the Hearing Division to the Appeal Division. The appeal panel found no palpable or overriding error in the hearing panel’s conclusions in regards to the findings of Mr. Robson’s failure to co-operate. The appeal panel also found no reversible error in the hearing panel’s conclusions regarding the grounds of appeal related to reasonable suspicion, reasoning that many of Mr. Robson’s assertions had no factual basis, it found no errors in the hearing panel’s decisions regarding specific requests for production, there was no error in principle in fixing the penalty nor was the penalty clearly unfit. The appeal was therefore dismissed and a timetable set out for submissions on costs.
Kumar Sriskanda, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Following the panel’s decision denying Mr. Sriskanda’s re-licensing application, the panel sought submissions on costs. Mr. Sriskanda did not make any submissions. The panel accepted the Law Society’s submissions as reasonable and ordered Mr. Sriskanda to pay $10,000 in costs.
Martin Christopher Schulz, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The Law Society unsuccessfully appealed a decision imposing a nine-month suspension and practice restrictions for a finding of professional misconduct in relation to a criminal conviction for possession of child pornography. Mr. Schulz requested an order that the Law Society pay his costs of the appeal. The panel found that Mr. Schulz did not meet his onus of establishing that the appeal was “unwarranted,” as although the Law Society was unsuccessful, the grounds of appeal engaged a novel issue of statutory interpretation and also were within the Law Society’s public interest mandate. Mr. Schulz’s request for costs was therefore dismissed.
Nargas Barak, Paralegal (Vaughan)
Ms. Barak was charged with two counts later withdrawn and one count of public mischief. Although obliged to report the offences to the Law Society as soon as reasonably practicable she did not do so until almost a year later. Ms. Barak also did not inform the Law Society of the disposition of the charges. She admitted, and the panel found, that she engaged in professional misconduct, and conduct unbecoming a paralegal licensee by committing public mischief. The panel accepted the joint submission on penalty as it would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute nor was it otherwise contrary to the public interest. Ms. Barak was suspended for one month and ordered to pay $2,000 in costs.
Michael Gerard Carey, Lawyer (Nepean)
Mr. Carey admitted to professional misconduct for: having a self-represented spouse in a divorce matter involving child support sign an affidavit without understanding why it was required or being informed of her husband’s income; signing a jurat without administering an oath; failing to reply promptly to communications from opposing counsel; and failing to provide prompt and complete answers to the Law Society. A joint submission was accepted as reasonable and fair in the circumstances. Mr. Carey was suspended for 45 days and costs of $6,000 to the Law Society were awarded.
Antoine Kheir, Paralegal (North York)
The parties provided an agreed statement of facts and joint submission on penalty. Mr. Kheir had no prior findings of misconduct and admitted his misconduct. The panel reviewed Mr. Kheir’s personal circumstances, and concluded that the proposed penalty was reasonable and not contrary to the public interest. The panel granted Mr. Kheir 30 days to surrender his licence and ordered $1,500 in costs.
Glen Edward Matthews, Lawyer (London)
Mr. Matthews did not attend the hearing. The panel found that he had proper notice of the application and the hearing and the matter proceeded in his absence based on deemed admissions. Mr. Matthews was found to have engaged in all allegations of professional misconduct, as well as to have misappropriated over $17,000 from trust funds belonging to five clients. The presumptive penalty for misappropriation is revocation. The panel found that no exceptional circumstances were demonstrated, and so Mr. Matthews’ licence was revoked and he was ordered to pay costs of $11,998.50 to the Law Society and to reimburse $8,085 to the Compensation Fund.
Alvin Martin Meisels, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Meisels was found to have engaged in professional misconduct by knowingly participating and assisting in fraudulent conduct. The panel found that he assisted his client to commit advance fee frauds in the context of mortgage applications by providing comfort letters that he knew contained false representations about his client’s ability to provide mortgage financing. Mr. Meisels did not participate in the hearing beyond attending at the beginning of the hearing and did not seek to set aside deemed admissions. The panel Mr. Meisels’ licence based on the presumptive penalty for knowing participation or assistance in dishonest or fraudulent conduct and a lack of evidence of mitigating circumstances. Mr. Meisels was ordered to pay costs of $75,000 to the Law Society, a penalty which the panel found to be reasonable, proportionate and within the parties’ reasonable expectations.
- 23/12/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Claudio Martini, Lawyer (Windsor)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on December 21, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Carlos Alberto Ortiz, Paralegal (Toronto)
Clifford Singh, Lawyer (Pickering)
Georgiana Stefania Masgras-Irshidat (21H-014 & 22H-048), Lawyer (Kitchener)
Four conduct hearings will be held on January 5, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Franklyn Scott Taylor, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings (22H-014 & 21H-086) will be held on January 5 & 6, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Tracey Marie Resetar, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on January 6, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Gordon Roy Baker, Lawyer (Torrance)
Mr. Baker engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Robson’s appeal is dismissed.
James Douglas Stewart Bowie, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Bowie engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
William Joseph Harry Bulmer, Paralegal (London)
Mr. Bulmer engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $5,615 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Claudio Martini, Lawyer (Windsor)
Mr. Martini admitted to multiple incidents of professional misconduct involving numerous clients. The parties agreed that revocation was the appropriate penalty. The panel agreed. The panel noted that revocation is the presumptive penalty for misappropriation as well as noting Mr. Martini’s record of prior discipline for much the same misconduct as here. Mr. Martini’s licence was therefore revoked, along with costs of $380,000 to the Law Society within six months.
Ronald John McKenna, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. McKenna did not attend the hearing. The panel found that he had proper notice of the application and the hearing and the matter proceeded in his absence. In 2016 and 2017, Mr. McKenna transferred trust money held on behalf of others to his general account. Although he later reimbursed the amount, the prior takings were improper and was misappropriation. Mr. McKenna was not aware that he was administratively suspended and acknowledged it was his responsibility to update his contact information. The panel found that he engaged in professional misconduct by practising while he was suspended. Mr. McKenna failed to advise the Law Society of his assignment in bankruptcy, failed to maintain proper books and records, and failed to promptly and completely respond to investigative inquiries. The presumptive penalty for misappropriation is revocation. The panel found that no exceptional circumstances were demonstrated. Mr. McKenna’s licence was therefore revoked, and he was ordered to pay costs of approximately $16,000 to the Law Society.
Baheerathy Sriskandakumar, Lawyer Applicant (Markham)
The good character investigation was initiated based on concerns about Ms. Sriskandakumar’s past conduct as well as misleading information she provided to the Law Societies of Manitoba and Ontario in her applications for licensing. Ms. Sriskandakumar had practised law in Sri Lanka and had been a magistrate in Belize but did not apply to be licensed in Ontario for a number of years while she worked as a law clerk in her husband’s law office. His licence was revoked for involvement in mortgage fraud and in the course of his hearing, Ms. Sriskandakumar was found to have improperly used his Teranet key and forged his signature on documents. She later applied to be licensed in both Manitoba and Ontario, but provided misleading information in her applications. The panel found that she had not demonstrated the required remorse or insight into her past conduct and had not established that she is currently of good character and dismissed her application to be licensed as a lawyer in Ontario. The panel invited submissions from the parties on costs.
Ruth-Anne Dawn Avruskin, Lawyer (Orangeville)
Ms. Avruskin did not respond fully to the Law Society investigator’s request for information and documents, despite numerous requests. She claimed that she did not receive all of the Law Society’s communications and that she was incapacitated, but the panel found that these claims were not established. The panel ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance, followed by a one-month suspension. Ms. Avruskin was ordered to pay reduced costs of $1,500 to the Law Society, taking into account financial hardship.
Eric Matthew Letts, Lawyer (Nepean)
Mr. Letts entered into an agreed statement of facts and acknowledged that he engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond in the course of a Law Society investigation and failure to keep prescribed records. He remediated these concerns by the time of the hearing and had no prior discipline history, and so the panel accepted the joint submission for a reprimand and costs of $2,162.
Matthew Douglas Feil, Lawyer (Waterloo)
Mr. Feil engaged in professional misconduct by disbursing funds to his client in breach of an agreement regarding the proceeds of the sale of a matrimonial home, failing to treat the court with candour regarding the disbursement of these trust funds, and failing to advise opposing counsel that he had breached the agreement or to advise succeeding counsel that he had failed to hold the funds in trust as required. He forged documents purporting to modify the original agreement regarding the trust funds and misled the Law Society in its investigation of these activities. The panel found that revocation was the appropriate remedy because of the serious nature and potential impact of the misconduct, and that there were no mitigating factors that would affect their assessment of penalty.
- 16/12/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Joseph Francesco Lo Greco, Lawyer (Aurora)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on December 12, 2022.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on December 12, 2022.
Stuart Cameron Murray, Lawyer (Port Stanley)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on December 9, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Sang-Kyun Suh, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held from December 19-21, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Alexandre Papouchine, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held from December 19-22, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Baheerathy Sriskandakumar, Lawyer Applicant (Markham)
Ms. Sriskandakumar is not presently of good character, and so her licensing application is dismissed.
Ruth-Anne Dawn Avruskin, Lawyer (Orangeville)
Ms. Avruskin engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. She is relieved of her undertaking not to practise law, and her licence is suspended until she has fully co-operated, and for one month after that. She is also ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Alvin Martin Meisels, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Meisels engaged in professional misconduct by knowingly participating in or assisting dishonesty or fraud. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $75,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Stephanie Colangelo, Paralegal Applicant (Port Colborne)
The Hearing Division’s order of November 11, 2022 is stayed pending appeal.
Stephen George Reynolds, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Reynolds engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation and failing to update his personal and business contact information. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for four months after that. He is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine, and a further $2,000 fine if he has not co-operated by January 9, 2023. He is also ordered to pay $2,737 in costs to the Law Society.
Michael Gerard Carey, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Carey engaged in professional misconduct by bringing discredit upon the legal profession, prejudicing the administration of justice, and contravening Rules 7.2-5 and 7.1-1 of the Rules of Professional Conduct. His licence is suspended for 45 days, and he is ordered to pay $6,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Sang-Kyun Suh, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Suh brought a motion for an order to admit the transcript of an investigation interview midway through the conduct hearing. The transcript was of a Law Society investigation interview of a senior staff member at Mr. Suh’s law firm, who had passed away before the hearing began. Mr. Suh argued that the transcript should be admitted based on its necessity and reliability. The panel decided to receive the transcript, but defer its rulings on admissibility and weight until the conclusion of the hearing, when it would be in a better position to assess the admissibility, reliability and relevance of the transcript, as well as possible procedural fairness grounds for admission.
Adam Robin William Graham Tye, Paralegal Applicant (Peterborough)
Mr. Tye disclosed a number of prior convictions on this licensing application; however, he did not disclose that he had charges pending at the time of the application. The panel determined that the misrepresentation on the application was intentional and thus Mr. Tye was deemed not to be of good character. Although not required, the panel conducted a good character analysis. While the evidence showed that Mr. Tye had had a challenging life and had come a long way, the panel found that the evidence did not yet support a finding of good character. Therefore, the licensing application was denied.
Farid Arbi, Paralegal (London)
Mr. Arbi acknowledged that he failed to maintain records of his practice as required, such as documentation of billings, receipts or disbursements, and a trust account. A fire destroyed his office in 2018 and he had not kept or recreated any records of his small practice since then. He disclosed that he had health issues and had been offered accommodation but had not identified any specific accommodations that the Law Society could have provided. The panel indefinitely suspended Mr. Arbi, pending compliance with record-keeping requirements and then for a further month, taking into account the need for specific and general deterrence. He was ordered to pay reduced costs of $2,500 to the Law Society within two years, based on the range of costs ordered for similar summary hearings and his limited ability to pay.
- 9/12/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Sarah Zakir, Lawyer (Markham)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on December 6, 2022.
Stephanie Nadia Colangelo, Paralegal Applicant (Port Colborne)
A notice of appeal was filed on December 5, 2022.
Dennis Kashmeel Keevantoza McKoena, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on December 5, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Alvin Martin Meisels, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held from December 12 to 16, 2022 at 10:00 am each day by videoconference.
Jitendra Kumar Sood, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct will be held from December 12 to 14, 2022 at 10:00 am each day by videoconference.
Michael Israel Rappaport, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A conduct hearing will be held from December 13 to 16, 2022 at 10:00 am each day by videoconference.
Abraham Barry Davis, Lawyer (Barrie)
A conduct hearing will be held from December 15, 2022 at 10:00 am by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Nargas Barak, Paralegal (Vaughan)
Ms. Barak engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a licensee by committing the criminal offence of public mischief, failing to report that she had been charged and failing to report the disposition of the charges as soon as possible. Her licence is suspended for one month and she is ordered to pay $2,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Ronauld Gordon Walton, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Walton is ordered to pay $2,268 in costs to the Law Society.
Kara Elane Noakes Hamilton, Lawyer (Victoria, BC)
Ms. Hamilton engaged in professional misconduct by acting for multiple clients without following the rule requirements and by failing to obtain consents to act in a joint retainer. She failed to serve multiple clients to the standard of a competent lawyer. She acted in a manner that harms the administration of justice and / or tends to bring discredit upon the legal profession by falsifying documents, notarizing false documents, misleading her clients, commissioning an affidavit containing false information and registering a real estate instrument containing false information as well as by withdrawing fees not properly earned and withdrawing fees contrary to the terms of the Power of Attorney for Property and/or the Substitute Decisions Act.
Ms. Hamilton’s licence is revoked. She is prohibited from acting as estate trustee for the estates of any of her clients or former clients and is prohibited from acting as attorney under a power of attorney given by any of her clients or former clients. She is ordered to pay costs to the Law Society of $69,623.50 and to reimburse individuals as set out in the order.
Adam Robin William Graham Tye, Paralegal Applicant (Peterborough)
Mr. Tye’s application for a paralegal licence is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Stephanie Nadia Colangelo, Paralegal Applicant (Port Colborne)
Ms. Colangelo indicated on her licensing application that she was currently the subject of criminal proceedings and was disciplined as a member of a professional organization. In 2020, she pled guilty to one count of child luring and a joint submission for a conditional sentence order was accepted by the court. The court noted her position of trust and although the communications started on an adult dating site, she should have ended them once she found out that they were students and minors. In 2021, her teaching licence was revoked. The panel found that the misconduct was serious, albeit at the lower end, and lasted only a short time. Ms. Colangelo was profoundly remorseful and had done a great deal of work to effect her rehabilitation. Her risk of re-offending has been assessed as very low and her conduct has been exemplary since the event. The panel concluded that she has demonstrated that she is currently of good character.
Everett Ross Field, Paralegal (Hamilton)
Mr. Field had been involved with racist and discriminatory activities before obtaining his licence. These activities came to the attention of the Law Society, which began an investigation into whether he had engaged in professional misconduct/conduct unbecoming by engaging in discriminatory, racist or misogynistic conduct, incivility or dishonourable conduct. He had been an active member of the Canadian Super Players (CSP), a neo-Nazi, white nationalist group, and participated under an alias in over 2,000 online posts, two racist podcasts and an article espousing misogynistic, antisemitic, racist and anti-immigrant views, as well as discussions of violence and weapons. Mr. Field’s responses to the Law Society during its investigation ranged from denial to prevarication about the nature of his involvement. His claim that his medical issues explained his behaviour was not established. The panel found that he mislead the Law Society regarding his alias and white-supremacist activities. After he eventually admitted his activities, the hearing proceeded on the basis of an agreed statement of facts. The panel accepted the joint submission of a four-month suspension and ongoing Equity, Diversity and Inclusion training as reasonable. The panel ordered costs of $3,000.
- 2/12/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Adam Christopher White, Lawyer (Keswick)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 29, 2022.
Sumeet Sood, Lawyer (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 28, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Girolamo Falletta, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on December 5, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kara Elane Noakes Hamilton, Lawyer (Victoria, B.C.)
Two conduct hearings (20H-125 & 21H-129) will be held on December 5, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
Myles Frederick McLellan, Lawyer Applicant (Sault Ste. Marie)
A licensing hearing will be held on December 6 & 7, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Michael Gerard Carey, Lawyer (Nepean)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 8, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Barry Stephen Bien, Lawyer (Amherstview)
Two conduct hearings (20H-062 & 20H-143) will be held on December 8, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
James Douglas Stewart Bowie, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on December 9, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
William Joseph Harry Bulmer, Paralegal (London)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 9, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Tracey Marie Resetar, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on December 9, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Stephen George Reynolds, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on December 9, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Samir Nagaty Ha Roman, Paralegal (Mississauga)
The hearing is adjourned to March 2023; Mr. Roman’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis until the completion of these proceedings.
Edmund Joseph Blaha, Paralegal (Etobicoke)
Mr. Blaha engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Jonathan Shulman, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Shulman engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with five Law Society investigations and by practicing law when his licence was suspended. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for two months after that, and he is ordered to pay $6,244 in costs to the Law Society. The version of Karen Gordon’s affidavit that is not redacted is also ordered to be not public.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Ms. Singh was found to have repeatedly engaged in serious misconduct in a number of settings and to have failed to meet her onus to establish she is presently of good character. She did not show remorse or candor, and ongoing conduct raised doubts about her integrity. The Law Society requested costs of $20,000 based on staff time, the cost of transcripts and Ms. Singh’s ability to pay. Ms. Singh disputed the Law Society’s entitlement to any costs because the Law Society representatives are salaried employees, and in the alternative, argued that costs should be limited to $2,000 based on her financial situation. Costs are payable by unsuccessful licensing applicants but can tempered by their actions and particular situation. The panel found that there was no evidence of impecuniosity, the hearing was four days and the Law Society had requested a number of adjournments with mixed success, Ms. Singh co-operated during the hearing but less substantively during the investigation, the Law Society had provided dockets that were not fully broken down, and the cost of transcripts was not usually claimed and non-official transcripts may be available for a less expensive price. As a result of these factors, the panel awarded $8,000 in costs to be paid in two installments over two years.
Lesley Mary Taafe, Lawyer (Oshawa)
Ms. Taafe was found to have engaged in various forms of professional misconduct in her representation of four clients based on a request to admit, to which she did not respond and therefore was deemed to admit the truth of its contents. Ms. Taafe was therefore found to have engaged in professional misconduct for improperly withdrawing from representation from her client, failing to serve three clients, failing to conduct herself with integrity, acting in a conflict of interest and behaving dishonourably. The panel directed the Tribunal to arrange a penalty hearing.
Jerry Michael Nesker, Lawyer (Toronto)
Based on an agreed statement of facts, the panel found that Mr. Nesker used his trust account to permit transfers of over $150 million from abroad for purposes unrelated to the practice of law. To provide a legal structure to the transactions, he drafted documents indicating that some of them were loans or lines of credit and joint retainers between the parties to the transactions, although there were no instructions that the transactions were in fact loans. He entered into retainer agreements with foreign entities without fulfilling client identification obligations or making efforts to ascertain the purpose of the retainers. He also failed to serve his client by acting on inappropriate instructions to disburse trust funds. In doing so, he assisted his client to bypass the decision by Canadian banks to disallow the client to receive money from overseas through a Canadian bank account, and took actions that could encourage, assist or facilitate dishonesty by his client. The panel accepted the joint submission permitting Mr. Nesker to surrender his licence within one month, and costs of $10,000, as this penalty achieved the goals of specific and general deterrence and of maintaining public confidence in the legal profession.
- 25/11/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Nathan William Currie, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on November 23, 2022.
Michael Donald James Corbett, Lawyer (Sudbury)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 23, 2022.
Timothy James Hilborn, Lawyer (Cambridge)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 21, 2022.
Patrick Joseph Mazurek, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 18, 2022.
Sumeet Sood, Lawyer (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 17, 2022.
Rathiga Velalagan, Paralegal (Oshawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 16, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Samir Nagaty Ha Roman, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Two conduct hearings (22H-003 & 20H-093) will be held from November 28 – December 2, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings (17H-065 & LCN66-16) will be held on November 28, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Sheila Joy Stanislawski, Lawyer (Nepean)
A motion within an appeal by the licensee will be heard on November 29, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Nargas Barak, Paralegal (Vaughan)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 30, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 1 & 2, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Tracey Marie Resetar, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on December 2, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
The panel orders that Ms. Singh will pay $8,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Claudio Martini, Lawyer (Windsor)
The panel orders that Mr. Martini will pay $380,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Ronald John McKenna, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. McKenna engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating approximately $6,427 from trust funds, practicing law while his licence was suspended, failing to immediately notify the Law Society that he had made an assignment in bankruptcy, failing to maintain books and records, and failing to provide a substantive response to Law Society communications. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $16,278 in costs to the Law Society.
Farid Arbi, Paralegal (London)
Mr. Arbi engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain books and records. His licence is suspended until he has brought his books and records into compliance, and for one month after that, he is ordered to provide the Law Society with monthly trust reconciliation reports for a period of one year, and he is ordered to pay $2,500 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Khalid Aziz Sheikh, Lawyer (Brampton)
Mr. Sheikh did not participate in the proceedings and was deemed to have admitted all of the facts contained in the request to admit. The Society proved that Mr. Sheikh had misappropriated $186,188.55 from trust funds held on behalf of his clients. The presumptive penalty for knowing participation in dishonesty or fraud is revocation, and because there was no evidence of extraordinary or exceptional circumstances that would require departure from this penalty, Mr. Sheikh’s licence was revoked, and costs of $15,000 were ordered.
David Simoes Malgueiro Campos, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Campos had previously acknowledged that he had suffered from substance abuse and mental health disorders and had settled previous capacity proceedings by entering into a number of undertakings involving treatment and a commitment to refrain from consuming alcohol or illicit drugs. In 2017 the Law Society learned of criminal charges against Mr. Campos and testimony in his bail hearing that suggested he was consuming alcohol in breach of his undertaking to abstain. The Law Society brought a motion for an interlocutory suspension, but this was settled when Mr. Campos signed a new undertaking not to practise. In 2020 Mr. Campos gave notice that he was no longer willing to be bound by this undertaking, and the Law Society commenced a new motion for an interlocutory suspension. This was abandoned when Mr. Campos provided a new undertaking not to practise. In 2021 Mr. Campos indicated that he would like to return to practice, but the medical examination required showed a positive test for alcohol consumption which again breached his previous undertaking. Mr. Campos and the Law Society differed on what would be required for protection of the public should Mr. Campos return to practice; the Law Society requested that he abstain from consuming alcohol, while Mr. Campos requested that a “harm reduction” approach be taken where he would not be required to abstain. Based on its assessment of the medical evidence, the panel found that the respondent was incapacitated, but could be capable of practising and accommodated in line with human rights legislation if he abstained from alcohol and drug use and complied with continuing treatment and monitoring. The panel will convene a case conference to hear submissions on the details of their order.
Margaret Mary Osadet, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Osadet admitted that she wrote the complainant’s signature on a consent related to an estates matter. The panel made a finding of professional misconduct, finding that the signature was improper and had the potential to mislead the court, even though the consent form was later withdrawn and had no consequence on the complainant. The panel accepted the joint submission of a 30-day suspension and costs of $1,500; there was no disciplinary history, only a single failure of integrity, no actual harm caused to the complainant, and the respondent took responsibility for her conduct, co-operated with the Law Society and entered into an agreed statement of facts.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Having earlier found that Mr. Isaac engaged in conduct unbecoming, the panel considered submissions on penalty and costs. Mr. Isaac submitted that the penalty hearing should be automatically stayed because he was applying to the Divisional Court for a review. The panel denied the stay. Mr. Isaac then submitted that the penalty hearing should be adjourned because the Law Society was, in his opinion, changing its position and seeking to have his licence revoked. The panel denied the adjournment because Mr. Isaac had ample notice of the Law Society’s position. The panel considered Mr. Isaac’s submissions and concluded that an invitation to attend would be inappropriate given the findings that he had engaged in serious misconduct. The panel considered Mr. Isaac’s conduct during the hearing and found that it was symptomatic of his disdain and lack of respect for the governance process. The panel found that this conduct adversely affected public confidence in the integrity of the profession, and that the conduct was not an aberration or out of character but rather a pattern of conduct. The panel considered the Aguirre factors as well as the Shifman test and concluded that Mr. Isaac’s conduct demonstrated a consistent, repetitive pattern of misconduct and/or a refusal to be governed by the rules of the profession. The panel therefore ordered Mr. Isaac’s licence to be revoked, and that he pay $37,664.55 in costs to the Law Society.
Peter Vadim Widz, Lawyer (Etobicoke)
Mr. Widz was convicted of assaulting his partner and admitted another incident of assault against his partner causing physical injury. He requested that the application be dismissed and converted to an ITA because of his remorse, rehabilitation and mitigating circumstances. The panel dismissed the motion and made a finding of conduct unbecoming, imposing a one-month suspension and ordering $3,000 in costs, reasoning that an application can only be converted into an ITA in exceptional circumstances once professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming has been found. This was not the case here, as gender-based violence causing emotional and physical injuries is very serious and conflicts with the duty of lawyers and paralegals to respect equality. Such behaviour is entirely unacceptable and the panel decided that the Tribunal must convey this view to the public and the professions. The panel found that Mr. Widz’s evidence of rehabilitation (such as counselling) did not overcome the seriousness of the conduct.
Shirley Joyce Virginia Henry, Lawyer (Mississauga)
In earlier reasons, the panel found that Ms. Henry had engaged in professional misconduct by borrowing money from a client, acting in a conflict of interest, and knowingly participating in a fraudulent scheme. The Law Society submitted that the presumptive penalty of revocation should apply, while Ms. Henry submitted that the findings were unreasonable and referred to systemic racism within the Law Society. Because Ms. Henry did not provide any evidence to show how systemic racism related to her conduct or to the appropriate penalty, the panel concluded that her licence should be revoked. She was also ordered to pay $50,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Sandra Zaher, Lawyer Applicant (Windsor)
Ms. Zaher sought to be re-licensed as a lawyer 10 days after having had her licence revoked for serious misconduct based on criminal convictions for knowingly fabricating a refugee claim for a client. The hearing panel had previously found that she did not establish that she was currently of good character because she applied for re-licensing only 10 days after her licence was revoked. The Law Society sought costs of $12,000 because Ms. Zaher should have known her application had virtually no chance of success, knew the Law Society would seek costs, and had the means to pay costs. The panel awarded $12,000 in costs to the Law Society because, although Ms. Zaher was cooperative and had low individual reported income in recent years, she had minimal time to show rehabilitation since her licence was revoked only 10 days before her application for re-licensing, she should have known that her application had very little chance of success, and she had previously stated that her spouse could provide financial assistance to her.
Jan-Lee McKenzie Hughes, Paralegal (Hagersville)
The conduct proceeding against Ms. Hughes was dismissed and no costs were awarded against her. The panel found the proceeding was warranted and that the Law Society did not cause costs to be incurred without reasonable cause or to be wasted by undue delay, negligence or other default. The panel did not award costs against the Law Society either.
Deborah Anne Humphreys, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
The Law Society requested an interlocutory suspension pending Ms. Humphreys’ compliance with the requirement to maintain books and records. A spot audit revealed that Ms. Humphreys had failed to maintain accurate and complete financial records and that shortages in her trust accounts were not reported in her Annual Reports. A further complaint alleged that she misappropriated trust funds to pay office expenses and payroll. Ms. Humphreys stated that she had begun working with a bookkeeper to recreate the books and records of her practice and was working with another lawyer to ensure all trust cheques were properly issued in future. The motion for an interlocutory suspension was dismissed by a majority of the panel. It found that the risk to the public could be adequately reduced by imposing practice restrictions, including a deadline to produce reconciled trust records and working with the bookkeeper and Ms. Humphreys, with signing authority over her trust account. Ms. Humphreys was not under investigation because of a complaint from a client and had never failed to close transactions due to trust deficiencies.
A dissenting member of the panel would have granted the motion for an interlocutory suspension on the basis that the evidence established serious concerns about Ms. Humphreys’ integrity, as there was evidence that she withdrew money from her trust account without any client authorization and that this money was transferred to an account for personal use. The dissenting panelist argued that these allegations raised a significant risk of harm to members of the public and the administration of justice that could only be addressed with a full licence suspension; although the suspension would cause hardship to Ms. Humphreys, the public interest in protecting the public and the reputation of the profession was paramount.
Richard Craig Anthony Patterson, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Patterson brought a motion seeking disclosure of the PAC memo. The panel set out the existing jurisprudence that a respondent is not entitled to disclosure of the PAC memo as a right; a respondent must show that the PAC memo is arguably relevant to a live issue and is not shielded by any admissibility principle. Mr. Patterson submitted that an analogy could be made between the PAC memo and the packet of documents submitted to obtain judicial authorization for a wiretap. Mr. Patterson could not demonstrate that the proposition had been accepted elsewhere, and the panel expressed concerns about the potential breadth of the proposition. The panel concluded that in every case in which there was an objection to the admissibility of evidence obtained by wiretap, the court must determine whether the search or seizure was lawful and so the information on which the authorization was based was relevant to a live issue. The question of whether PAC should have authorized the conduct application was not a live issue before the Tribunal. PAC’s decision was final and not subject to review; the live issue before the Tribunal was the alleged misconduct of the licensee. The PAC memo was not part of the process by which evidence was obtained nor was it evidence to be used against the licensee. The panel found, therefore, that the proposed analogy failed. Mr. Patterson submitted that the PAC memo was arguably relevant to alleged racial discrimination. After reviewing the evidence regarding the alleged misconduct and the alleged circumstantial evidence of discrimination, the panel concluded that there was no circumstantial evidence that race was a factor in seeking PAC authorization or in PAC’s decision making. The panel noted that supervising the Law Society’s prosecutorial decision-making process is beyond the Tribunal’s reach. The motion was therefore dismissed.
David Wynne Jones, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Jones admitted to engaging in professional misconduct. He hired an accountant to help him with getting his books and records in order, but the work was not yet complete. The panel indefinitely suspended Mr. Jones, pending compliance with the By-Law requirements, and then for a further 30 days. He was also ordered to pay $2,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Speros Constantine Kanellos, Lawyer (North York)
A 2019 re-audit to follow up on prior deficiencies in Mr. Kanellos’ bookkeeping found six instances of overdrawn client trust ledgers caused by his bookkeeping system. Mr. Kanellos had now upgraded his bookkeeping system. Mr. Kanellos was found to have engaged in professional misconduct and to have breached his previous undertaking to the Law Society. The panel concluded that the joint submission of a reprimand and further spot audit was reasonable and not unhinged from the circumstances of the case because of mitigating circumstances, including that Mr. Kanellos had no prior disciplinary record in 43 years of practice, he co-operated fully, facilitated the hearing and accepted responsibility, and there had never been concerns regarding his honesty or integrity. Mr. Kanellos was reprimanded and ordered to participate in a further spot audit within 18 months. He was also ordered to pay $2,000 in costs to the Law Society.
- 18/11/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Joyann Vallane Oliver, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 16, 2022.
Jeremy Merrick Magence, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 16, 2022.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 14, 2022.
Abtisam A. Muslim, Paralegal (Thunder Bay)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 14, 2022.
Winfield Edward Corcoran, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 11, 2022.
Tarnjit Singh Aujla, Lawyer Applicant (Brampton)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on November 11, 2022.
Victor Alexander McHady, Paralegal (Rockwood)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 11, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Ronald John McKenna, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 21 & 22, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Carlos Alberto Ortiz, Paralegal (Toronto)
Clifford Singh, Lawyer (Pickering)
Georgiana Stefania Masgras-Irshidat (21H-014 & 22H-048), Lawyer (Kitchener)
Four conduct hearings will be held on November 21 & 24, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings (LCN66-16 & 17H-065) will be held on November 22 & 23, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
A capacity hearing will be held on November 24, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jonathan Shulman, Lawyer (North York)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on November 25, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Vaibhav Phukela, Paralegal (Oakville)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 25, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Mark Stansfield Trenholme, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 25, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ronald James Walker, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on November 25, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Sandra Zaher, Lawyer Applicant (Windsor)
The panel orders that Ms. Zaher will pay $12,000 in costs to the Law Society.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Isaac engaged in conduct unbecoming a licensee by attending court on behalf of his client while his licence was suspended, misleading a judge on two occasions, failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations, engaging in dishonourable conduct, failing to deliver a final reporting letter, failing to respond to telephone calls, messages and emails from his clients and mishandling $4,550.59 of funds held in trust. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $37,664.55 in costs to the Law Society.
Peter Vadim Widz, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Widz engaged in conduct unbecoming a licensee by twice assaulting his former partner, causing her serious injury. His licence is suspended for one month, and he is ordered to pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Jonathan Shulman, Lawyer (North York)
Mr. Shulman’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Stephanie Nadia Colangelo, Paralegal Applicant (Port Colborne)
Ms. Colangelo is presently of good character, and so is eligible to be granted a P1 licence.
Kumar Sriskanda, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Sriskanda will pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
William Ndze Fuhgeh, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Following a hearing of 20 days, the Hearing Division revoked Mr. Fuhgeh’s licence and awarded costs of $100,000. On appeal, Mr. Fuhgeh essentially challenged every ruling made against him. He brought a motion for leave to introduce fresh evidence, but the appeal panel found the material was not relevant, and if any of it was relevant it all related to events prior to the hearing. The panel therefore dismissed the motion.
The panel concluded that the hearing had been conducted in a fair and impartial manner, and found no merit to Mr. Fuhgeh’s procedural fairness arguments. Because Mr. Fuhgeh did not establish any palpable and overriding error in the hearing panel’s factual findings or the assessments of credibility, and because the hearing panel correctly determined the law that applied to the various decisions it made and those decisions were reasonable, as well as the fact that Mr. Fuhgeh did not establish that the penalty imposed was clearly unfit, the appeal panel dismissed the appeal.
- 11/11/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Cheryl Lisa MacKinnon, Paralegal (Wahnapitae)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 7, 2022.
Gordon Roy Baker, Lawyer (Torrance)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 4, 2022.
Deborah Anne Humphreys, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
A notice of appeal by the Law Society was filed on November 3, 2022.
Mimi Tang, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 2, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Thomas Michael Harris, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 14, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paulos Luizos, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 15, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings (LCN66-16 & 17H-065) will be held on November 15 & 16, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Carlos Alberto Ortiz, Paralegal (Toronto)
Clifford Singh, Lawyer (Pickering)
Georgiana Stefania Masgras-Irshidat (21H-014 & 22H-048), Lawyer (Kitchener)
Four conduct hearings will be held on November 17 & 18, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Farid Arbi, Paralegal (London)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on November 18, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Speros Constantine Kanellos, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Kanellos engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain sufficient balances on deposit in trust for six clients, in contravention of an undertaking. A reprimand is ordered, along with a spot audit and $2,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Everett Ross Field, Paralegal (Hamilton)
Mr. Field engaged in professional misconduct by misleading the Law Society during its investigation into his identity as “Red Serge”. His licence is suspended for four months, he is ordered to complete five hours of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion training, and he is ordered to pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Aliamisse Omar Mundulai, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Mundulai’s licence was revoked for ungovernability in 2012 after a significant discipline history. He applied to be licensed again in 2018. The panel earlier found that Mr. Mundulai had not met his burden of proving that he was presently of good character on the basis that he tried to mislead the Law Society by making false or misleading statements and failing to disclose facts in his licensing application. The panel ordered Mr. Mundulai to pay costs of $13,168 within one year because: his application for re-licensing was dismissed; his application had no reasonable chance of succeeding given his recent criminal convictions; his conduct during the hearing demonstrated his ongoing ungovernability; the hearing was needlessly lengthened; he was on notice that the Law Society would seek costs; he did not provide evidence of his claimed financial circumstances; and the requested amount was within the range of costs awarded in other cases.
Ronauld Gordon Walton, Lawyer (Toronto)
In 2014 and 2016 the Superior Court of Ontario made a number of findings in civil proceedings in which Mr. Walton was a respondent. Mr. Walton brought a motion to allow him to introduce evidence to contradict the judicial findings. The motion was dismissed because Mr. Walton did not provide disclosure as required by the panel. Mr. Walton filed will-say statements in advance of the hearing that suggested he intended to challenge the judicial findings despite the fact that his motion was dismissed. The panel was advised that Mr. Walton was ill and would not be attending the motion. The motion proceeded based on written submissions. The panel concluded that the anticipated evidence mostly amounted to relitigating the judicial findings and thus would give rise to the harms sought to be avoided by duplicating proceedings, including: wasting resources, concerns regarding inconsistent decisions, the desire for finality etc. The panel ordered that Mr. Walton was not permitted to relitigate the judicial findings.
- 03/11/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Robert Angus Lewis, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 28, 2022.
Stephen George Reynolds, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 26, 2022.
Timothy Michael Kinnaird, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 26, 2022.
Girolamo Falletta, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on October 26, 2022.
James Douglas Stewart Bowie, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 26, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings (17H-065 & LCN66-16) will be held on November 7, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ruth-Anne Dawn Avruskin, Lawyer (Orangeville)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on November 7, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Dunstan Dan Senjule, Lawyer Applicant (Newmarket)
A licensing hearing will be held on November 8 & 9, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Brandon Keven Rooney, Lawyer (Stratford)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 8 & 9, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jonathan Shulman, Lawyer (North York)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on November 10, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Patrick Glemaud, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on November 11, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Aliamisse Omar Mundulai, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Mundulai will pay $13,168 in costs to the Law Society.
Petar Lulic, Lawyer (Bronx, N.Y.)
Mr. Lulic engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with five Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Rhonda Fleming, Paralegal (Merrickville-Wolford)
Ms. Fleming engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a licensee by mishandling $1,500, misleading a client, and withdrawing from representation without good cause and reasonable notice. Her licence is suspended for three months, and she is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Monika Tomaszewska, Paralegal (Etobicoke)
Ms. Tomaszewska’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Glenn Edward Matthews, Lawyer (London)
Mr. Matthews engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating funds, failing to maintain proper books and records, providing legal services without obtaining the relevant permit, failing to respond to communications from another solicitor, abandoning his practice, and failing to serve five clients to the standard of a competent lawyer. His licence is revoked, he is ordered to pay $8,085 to the Compensation Fund, and $11,998.50 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Rhonda Fleming, Paralegal (Merrickville-Wolford)
Ms. Fleming had previously been found to have engaged in professional misconduct by depositing retainer funds into her personal bank account before providing legal services or delivering a bill, failing to commence a Small Claims Court action despite being retained to do so, misleading her client about the status of her action, and eventually ceasing to communicate with her client without cause or notice. The Law Society requested a three-month suspension, which Ms. Fleming did not dispute. The Law Society also requested costs of $8,000; Ms. Fleming suggested a lower costs award of $854.04 because of her medical condition and poor financial situation and an additional penalty of further professional development. The panel ordered a three-month suspension, finding that it fell within a reasonable range of penalty for this type of misconduct. Costs were ordered in the amount of $5,000 with two years to pay based on her ability to pay, and also the unnecessary length of the proceedings, which were prolonged by Ms. Fleming.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
The Law Society brought a motion to rely upon the findings of fact in reasons of a deputy judge of the Toronto Small Claims Court (the contempt decision) as proof of those facts and to prohibit Mr. Bush from re-litigating the findings of fact. After finding that the contempt decision was admissible, the panel held that the Law Society’s request was broad, as the paragraphs listed contained more than just the factual findings of the Deputy Judge. However, the Law Society’s motion was granted in regard to the specified findings of fact set out in the reasons.
- 28/10/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Ronald James Walker, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 25, 2022.
Nnamdi Sunny-Venn Vincent, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 25, 2022.
Steven Russell Michael, Lawyer (Kitchener)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 19, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Everett Ross Field, Paralegal (Hamilton)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 1, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Speros Constantine Kanellos, Lawyer (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 2, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Raymond Joseph Yvon Lachapelle, avocat (Hawkesbury)
Une audience de conduite est prévue pour le 3 novembre 2022 à 10 h par vidéoconférence.
Tracey Marie Resetar, Lawyer (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on November 4, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Lisa Elizabeth Simone, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Ms. Simone is presently of good character, and so is eligible for a P1 licence.
William Ndze Fuhgeh, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Fuhgeh’s appeal is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
Mr. Culliton appealed the hearing panel’s findings that he had failed to co-operate and was ungovernable, the decision to revoke his licence to practise law, and the costs award. Mr. Culliton also appealed the refusal of his request to adjourn the penalty hearing on the grounds that the penalty hearing was not in-person. The panel found that there were no exceptional circumstances to grant an adjournment and there was nothing unfair about a hearing conducted by videoconference. The panel further found that agreeing to an ASF did not mean that previous un-co-operative behaviour did not occur. Because there were no palpable or overriding errors in the hearing panel’s findings on ungovernability, or in principle in the analysis under Shifman, the appeal panel upheld the hearing panel’s decision on costs as eminently reasonable. The appeal was therefore dismissed, and Mr. Culliton was ordered to pay costs of appeal of $20,000.
Steven Donald Bezaire, Lawyer (Windsor)
Mr. Bezaire entered an agreed statement of facts and admitted to having engaged in professional misconduct by acting in the sale of a property in circumstances when he ought to have known he was facilitating fraud, failing to supervise his law practice and improperly delegating tasks to a non-lawyer employee, allowing a non-lawyer to use his e-reg diskette and pass phrase for real estate transactions, and failing to assume complete professional responsibility for his practice by failing to review all relevant documents, which resulted in a beneficiary of an estate being deprived of his share of the estate. The parties made a joint submission for a one-month suspension and costs in the amount of $15,000, which the panel accepted because: the fraud involved only one incident and did not involve other clients; all of the ethical breaches were linked to the one sale file only; Mr. Bezaire did not personally benefit; the amounts involved were relatively low and were mitigated by a voluntary payment by Mr. Bezaire of $20,000 to the beneficiary’s family; Mr. Bezaire was remorseful and accepted full responsibility; he had no prior disciplinary record; and there was no evidence of dishonesty on his part.
Darcy John Daoust, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Daoust admitted he committed professional misconduct by failing to respond promptly and completely to correspondence from the Law Society, failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation, and failing to provide a compliance report. The parties provided a joint submission recommending revocation of Mr. Daoust’s licence. The panel made a finding of professional misconduct but found that revocation was inappropriate as the misconduct only stemmed from continued failure to comply with orders of a previous panel. Mr. Daoust admitted the misconduct and provided some limited evidence regarding mental health to explain the misconduct for purposes of penalty. The panel suggested additional settlement discussions, and the parties suggested a revised joint submission providing Mr. Daoust one last opportunity before his licence would be revoked. The panel accepted the revised joint submission for a penalty of immediate suspension and a further two-month suspension following compliance with the Law Society’s requests by a deadline. If the deadline was not met, Mr. Daoust’s licence would be revoked. The panel also ordered costs of $4,953.
- 21/10/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Yuce Baykara, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 17, 2022.
Edmund Joseph Blaha, Paralegal (Etobicoke)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 17, 2022.
Brian Allen Sherman, Lawyer (Aurora)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 17, 2022.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of appeal by the licence applicant was filed on October 14, 2022.
Jonathan Shulman, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on October 14, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Lisa Elizabeth Simone, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held on October 24 & 25, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Glen Edward Matthews, Lawyer (London)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 26, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a capacity hearing will be held on October 26, 2022 at 11:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Monika Tomaszewska, Paralegal (Etobicoke)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on October 28, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ruth-Anne Dawn Avruskin, Lawyer (Orangeville)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on October 28, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Tracey Marie Resetar, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on October 28, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Farid Arbi, Paralegal (London)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on October 28, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Matthew Adam Beau-Thane Carson, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Carson engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating trust funds, withdrawing $25,000 from a client’s trust account, and failing to maintain proper books and records. His licence is revoked. He is ordered to pay $57,438.12 to the Compensation Fund and $2,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
The panel orders that Mr. Culliton will pay $20,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
A.C., Paralegal Applicant (Brampton)
A.C. was convicted of assaulting his minor children and former spouse and received a sentence of time served and two years probation. The panel concluded that he did not establish that he was currently of good character, as the misconduct was very serious and he did not show that he was remorseful or rehabilitated because, although he completed a partner assault program, he continued to deny wrongdoing and did not take responsibility for his actions. Because the panel found that A.C. did not meet the onus of establishing that he was presently of good character, the application for licensing was dismissed. The parties agreed that because of a publication ban ordered in the criminal proceedings to protect the identities of the victims or witnesses, their names and identifying information would not be included in the Tribunal reasons. As a result, A.C.’s name was anonymized.
Simon Andrew Hildyard, Paralegal (Ajax)
Mr. Hildyard pleaded guilty to a number of criminal offences, including sexual exploitation of a young person and attempt to obstruct justice/dissuade a witness. He was sentenced to three-and-a-half years in a penitentiary, less time served. He chose not to attend the Tribunal hearing or to contest the requested penalty of revocation. The panel found him to have engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a paralegal as a result of the criminal convictions. It also found that he had engaged in professional misconduct by appearing at Youth Justice Court, which was outside his permissible scope of practice. The panel reasoned that, where there was a criminal conviction for a serious offence of this nature, the presumptive penalty, absent mitigating circumstances, was revocation. Because there was no evidence of mitigating factors which would warrant departing from this presumptive penalty, the panel revoked Mr. Hildyard’s licence to provide legal services and ordered costs of $4,575.
Matthew Adam Beau-Thane Carson, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Carson was found to have misappropriated approximately $34,000 of trust funds; withdrawn $25,000 of trust funds held on behalf of his client for the benefit of other clients; and failed to maintain proper books and records of his law practice. The panel accepted a joint submission for the presumptive penalty of revocation of Mr. Carson’s licence to practise. His client was paid $117,407.93 by the Law Society Compensation Fund as compensation for settlement funds held in trust by Mr. Carson that were never paid to him. The panel ordered Mr. Carson’s licence be revoked and that he pay $57,438.12 to the Compensation Fund, which was in addition to $59,067 in trust funds held by the Law Society, and $2,000 in costs.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Peel)
Ms. Deokaran sought to appeal an interlocutory order suspending her licence to practise. She filed the appeal more than 30 days after the order suspending her licence, which was late, but within 30 days of the reasons for decision being released, on the mistaken advice of her lawyer. The panel found that Ms. Deokaran satisfied the test for an extension of time to appeal in that she formed an intention to appeal within the applicable 30-day appeal period, as she told her previous lawyer that she wanted to appeal within this timeframe, but was incorrectly advised that she had to wait until the reasons were issued to appeal the interlocutory order. It reasoned that her lack of communication with the Law Society and her lawyer afterward and any previous experience with appeals were not relevant to the question of when she formed an intention to appeal. Further, the delay was not lengthy and she had a reasonable explanation for it, as she relied on the mistaken advice of her lawyer that the time period to appeal only began after the reasons were released. Additionally, the panel noted that there was no practical prejudice to the Law Society caused by the delay. Regarding the justice of the case, all other factors pointed toward granting leave to appeal, and while there may have been questionable merit in the appeal, there was a low threshold to assess the merit of the appeal in the context of a request for leave to appeal with limited submissions. The motion for leave to appeal was therefore granted.
- 14/10/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Dion Radcliffe McClean, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 12, 2022.
Monika Tomaszewska, Paralegal (Etobicoke)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on October 12, 2022.
Heath Peter Leyrow Whiteley, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 3, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Gary Morton Kuchar, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 17, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Milica Birkett, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held on October 17, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
Adam Robin William Graham Tye, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held on October 18 & 19, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Courtney Akinwale Kazembe, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 20 & 21, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Jason Michael Ramsay, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Ramsay engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with several Law Society investigations. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $7,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Mary Margaret Osadet, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Osadet engaged in professional misconduct by failing to act with integrity. Her licence is suspended for 30 days, and she is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
A.C., Paralegal Applicant (Brampton)
A.C. is not presently of good character, and so his licensing application is dismissed.
Shirley Joyce Virginia Henry, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Ms. Henry engaged in professional misconduct by acting in a conflict of interest, knowingly participating in a fraudulent investment scheme and failing to act with integrity. Her licence is revoked, and she is ordered to pay $68,613.80 in costs to the Law Society.
Kumar Sriskanda, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Sriskanda did not establish that he is presently of good character, and so he is ineligible to be re-licenced. His licensing application is dismissed.
Antoine Kheir, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Kheir engaged in professional misconduct by breaching undertakings, failing to deposit client funds, providing legal services outside the scope of a paralegal, failing to serve clients to the standard of a competent paralegal, misleading a client, failing to co-operate with the Law Society and failing to maintain books and records. He is granted 30 days to surrender his licence, failing which it will be revoked. He is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Gregory Leung Sing Chang, Lawyer (North York)
The Law Society brought a motion for interlocutory suspension pending the determination of eight active investigations regarding Mr. Chang, one of which is a capacity investigation. Allegations involved, among other things, practising while suspended and failure to comply with obligations resulting from the suspension, plus failure to serve clients, mishandling monies in trust, failure to deposit trust monies in a trust account, and failure to maintain books and records. The panel concluded that Mr. Chang had notice of the motion and the hearing and that the matter could proceed in his absence. The panel found that the issues at matter showed an ongoing pattern of failure to serve clients, and that there were reasonable grounds for believing there was a significant risk of harm to the public and to the public interest in the administration of justice if an order was not made. An interlocutory suspension was therefore ordered. Due to the possibility that a mental health situation may have prevented him from defending the allegations, Mr. Chang was given an opportunity to bring a motion to vary or cancel the interlocutory order after a period of six months.
Daniel John Thompson, Lawyer (Brighton)
The panel found that Mr. Thompson had a duty to report a claim against him whether or not he considered the claim to have merit. He breached the Rules of Professional Conduct prohibiting him from acting for both transferor and transferee in the transfer of title to real property. Mr. Thompson was also found to have breached the Rules of Professional Conduct by not disclosing all material information in a transaction when acting for both the borrower and lender. The panel found that the joint submission on penalty did not offend the public interest, and so Mr. Thompson was suspended for one month and ordered to pay costs of $15,000 to the Law Society.
Leon Stanley Wickham, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Following the finding portion of the hearing, Mr. Wickham requested an adjournment. The parties agreed to have the penalty and costs portion of the hearing proceed in writing. Mr. Wickham did not file formal submissions or clearly set out his position. Despite numerous requests and extensions, he did not provide a response to the investigator’s request for information and documents. While he provided some documents and transcripts from the court proceeding, he did not explain their relevance. The panel was not persuaded that Mr. Wickham acted in good faith or made every reasonable effort to respond. By the time of the hearing Mr. Wickham had yet to respond. The panel ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance, followed by a two-month suspension, as well as $3,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Gary Donald McQuaid, Lawyer (Woodstock)
Mr. McQuaid failed to monitor his client’s matrimonial law file and this resulted in hardship to his client. He failed to respond to letters from opposing counsel until months had passed. When he returned the client’s file, it included materials related to other clients. Mr. McQuaid also lost or misplaced copies of his client’s documents. The panel noted that Mr. McQuaid was a senior member of the Bar with a limited discipline history. He also co-operated fully and expressed understanding of the prejudice done to his former clients. The panel concluded that the proposed alternative penalty of a two-month suspension was not unhinged. The panel also accepted the parties’ joint submission that Mr. McQuaid be permitted to surrender his licence given his intention not to continue practising law. The panel further accepted the joint costs submission. Mr. McQuaid was granted permission to surrender his licence and ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Kumar Sriskanda, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
MAJORITY: Mr. Sriskanda’s licence to practise law was revoked in February 2016 and had been suspended since November 2014. The Divisional Court dismissed his attempt to appeal in June 2017. The misconduct went on for five years and Mr. Sriskanda was found to have knowingly participated in mortgage fraud involving 12 properties. He failed to be honest and candid with his clients, failed to demonstrate integrity, and attempted to mislead the Law Society. While some time had passed since the events, the panel found that evidence suggested Mr. Sriskanda only accepted the findings of misconduct in the last two years. Additionally, while he expressed sincere and profound regret for having been caught he expressed no remorse for the harm caused. Mr. Sriskanda did not attempt to make amends nor had he accepted that the conduct stemmed from a lack of integrity and honesty. The majority found Mr. Sriskanda’s reference letters to be less than convincing, as none showed any real understanding of the extent and gravity of the misconduct and reflected a relatively superficial appreciation of the ethical issues. The majority found insufficient evidence of rehabilitation and concluded that Mr. Sriskanda had not met the burden of establishing that he was of good character, having failed to exhibit the required attributes of integrity, candour, empathy and honesty. Therefore, the majority dismissed the application for licensing.
DISSENT: The dissent noted the lengthy period of time since the last misconduct, and accepted the reference letters, as it found the writers were familiar with the misconduct and sufficiently familiar with Mr. Sriskanda to provide an opinion on his current character (particularly the letters written by other members of the LSO). The dissent noted that there was no evidence of misconduct or fraud in ay other areas of Mr. Sriskanda’s practice, and concluded that placing undue emphasis on past misconduct rendered ‘second chances’ unattainable. It found that Mr. Sriskanda was candid and realistic in his assessment of his application, which did not indicate a lack of remorse or insight. The dissent concluded that Mr. Sriskanda was now remorseful, and had taken sufficient efforts towards rehabilitation; the dissent found that the evidence established on a balance of probability that Mr. Sriskanda is of good character now. The dissent would have allowed the application with the restriction that Mr. Sriskanda not practise real estate law.
Jason Michael Ramsay, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Ramsay remained suspended under the most recent order almost nine months after it was imposed. The Law Society began several investigations arising from client complaints in 2021. Mr. Ramsay was sent multiple letters regarding the investigations between July and October 2021. None of the outstanding requested information was produced. The panel found that Mr. Ramsay’s regulatory history established an ongoing pattern of failing to meet professional obligations. While he accepted responsibility for his misconduct, he had already done so three prior times and his behaviour had not changed. The panel found that Mr. Ramsay’s conduct made it clear that he was unwilling or unable to follow the rules of the paralegal profession; it therefore found him to be ungovernable and ordered his licence to provide legal services revoked. He was also ordered to pay $7,000 in costs to the Law Society.
- 07/10/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
David Mark Marcovitch, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 29, 2022.
Michael D. George Martosh, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 28, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Antoine Kheir, Paralegal (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 12, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Baheerathy Sriskandakumar, Lawyer Applicant (Markham)
A licensing hearing will be held on October 13 & 14, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Patrick Glemaud, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on October 14, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
David Wynne Jones, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Jones engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain books and records. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for thirty days after that, and he is ordered to pay $2,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Deborah Anne Humphreys, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
Ms. Humphreys’ licence is restricted on an interlocutory basis. If she does not bring her books and records into compliance within thirty days, her licence will be suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Maurice Henri Gatien, Lawyer (Cornwall)
Mr. Gatien engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
Mr. Culliton’s appeal is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Khan appealed several decisions of two panels of the Hearing Division. He sought a stay of the revocation of his licence and an order dispensing with the requirement that he file hearing transcripts. The panel explained that the ultimate issue was whether the interests of justice favoured a stay. The appellant made submissions for which there appeared to be no support. The panel noted that the appellant’s challenges to the earlier decisions appear weak. The panel concluded that consequences of a presumptive revocation flow in any revocation case and the public interest takes precedence over the appellant’s personal interest. The stay motion was dismissed. The panel noted that it had the jurisdiction to not apply the Tribunal’s Rules strictly, and fashioned a hybrid solution; it granted leave to perfect the appeal without transcripts and allowed the Law Society to verify, once the appeal is perfected, whether in its view transcripts are required. The Law Society could then request a PMC, order the transcripts itself, or proceed without them. The appellant was granted leave to perfect the appeal without filing transcripts.
- 29/09/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
There were no new notices posted this week.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Courtney Akinwale Kazembe, Lawyer (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 3, 4 & 7, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Shirley Joyce Virginia Henry, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 3, 2022 at 1:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Margaret Mary Osadet, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 4, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Neil Lawrence Boyko, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings (20H-111 & 20H-048) will be held on October 6, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
There were no new orders posted this week.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Aliamisse Omar Mundulai, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Mundulai’s licence was revoked for ungovernability in 2012 after a significant discipline history. He applied to be licensed again in 2018. As of August 2021, he owed funds to the Law Society, the Compensation Fund, and LawPRO. Despite indicating on his application that there were no damages or costs awards outstanding as a result of litigation, it was determined that money remained owing for damages and costs. Despite also indicating he had not been subject to insurance claims, it was determined that there had been six claims reported against him. Mr. Mundulai disclosed his 2013 convictions for driving while impaired and failing to provide a breath sample. Though he was still licensed when he was charged, he did not advise the Law Society of the charges at the time. He was also arrested and charged in July 2019 arising out of a domestic assault but did not advise the Law Society until questioned in August 2020. The panel concluded that the applicant tried to mislead the Law Society by making false or misleading statements and by failing to disclose facts in his licensing application. There were numerous breaches of s. 8(2) of By Law 4, which sets out that an applicant who makes false or misleading statements on a licensing application is deemed not to be of good character. The panel concluded that Mr. Mundulai did not establish that he is currently of good character, and so dismissed his application.
Susan Jane Von Achten, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel earlier found that Ms. von Achten engaged in professional misconduct for failing to deposit funds into her trust account, appropriating funds and failing to be honest and candid and act with integrity. Requirements surrounding client funds are important and help ensure licensees honour their fiduciary and regulatory obligations to their clients. The panel found that this was significant misconduct that put client money at risk and continued from fall 2018 to spring 2019. It rejected Ms. von Achten’s claims that she was muddled or confused. The panel did not accept that inattention and stress explained using client money improperly or failing to have procedures in place to account for client money. The panel ordered a four-month suspension of Ms. von Achten’s licence beginning on August 22, 2022 and costs of $20,000 over four years.
Joshua Jaisimha David, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The Law Society received a complaint from a financial institution about transactions in Mr. David’s trust account. He admitted that since 2019 he has not maintained proper books and records. The panel accepted the joint submission on penalty as being reasonable and not contrary to the pubic interest. Mr. David’s licence was suspended immediately, continuing indefinitely until he brought his books and records into compliance, and for one month thereafter. He was also ordered to pay $2,000 in costs.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel had earlier found that Mr. Khan engaged in 30 separate particulars of professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming. Mr. Khan declined to fully participate in the penalty hearing and neither testified nor submitted any evidence. The misconduct and conduct unbecoming spanned a period of about six years and involved a pattern of dishonesty and lack of integrity. The panel found that Mr. Khan knowingly assisted in fraud, fraudulently registered mortgages and then invoked court processes to enforce them. It held that revocation was the presumptive penalty due to the nature of the professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming. There was no evidence of extraordinary circumstances such that revocation should not be ordered, and so the panel ordered the revocation of Mr. Khan’s licence, and that he pay the Law Society $132,000 in costs.
Piero Perciballi, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
On his licensing application, Mr. Perciballi disclosed prior convictions for armed robbery in 1998 and for fraud in 2014. He failed to disclose an outstanding civil fraud judgment and outstanding family support orders. Mr. Perciballi was a Toronto Police Service officer and leveraged that position to commit a $3.1 million robbery of an armoured vehicle in 1998. In 2009, Mr. Perciballi was involved in the planning and organization of a scheme that defrauded two banks of hundreds of thousands of dollars. In 2012, a consent order was obtained against him for fraudulent misrepresentation, fraud, conspiracy to fraud and procuring loan advances based on false pretenses. The prior misconduct was very serious and spanned nearly 20 years. The panel found no objective evidence before them supporting his remorse. There was likewise no objective evidence to show that Mr. Perciballi underwent a successful rehabilitation process. The panel found that Mr. Perciballi is not presently of good character and dismissed his application for a licence.
- 23/09/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
There were no new notices posted this week.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Richard Craig Anthony Patterson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on September 26, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Peter Vadim Widz, Lawyer (Etobicoke)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 27, 2022 at 11:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ronauld Gordon Walton, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on September 27, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Courtney Akinwale Kazembe, Lawyer (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 27 & 28, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ghazal Qureshi, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 27 & 28, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jerry Michael Nesker, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 28, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
David Wynne Jones, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on September 29, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Darcy John Daoust, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Daoust engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation, failing to respond promptly and completely to Law Society correspondence, and failing to provide a requested Compliance Report. His licence is suspended until he has fully complied with Law Society requests. If he has done so by December 20, 2022, his licence will be suspended for an additional two months. If he has not, his licence is revoked. He is also ordered to pay $4,953 in costs to the Law Society.
Kristine Genevieve Holder, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Holder engaged in professional misconduct by practising while suspended and holding herself out as entitled to practise while she was suspended. Her licence is suspended for five months, and she is ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Susan Jane von Achten, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. von Achten is ordered to pay $20,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Piero Perciballi, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Perciballi is not presently of good character, and so his licensing application is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Licio Edward Cengarle, Lawyer (Etobicoke)
The Law Society sought revocation of Mr. Cengarle’s licence after the panel found he had: failed to maintain the security of his Personalized Security Package; failed to fulfill an undertaking; mishandled trust funds; operated his practice in such a way that he ought to have known could facilitate dishonesty or fraud by a third party; failed to supervise his employee as required; and failed to respond promptly and completely to Law Society communications. The panel noted that although the misconduct involved a serious breach and had a significant financial impact, Mr. Cengarle did not knowingly participate in fraud and did not personally benefit from it. He had cooperated with the Law Society, admitted the allegations and showed remorse. His previous discipline history involving a loan to his employee was not similar to the present misconduct and did not involve fraud. The panel found that a retroactive suspension of 18 months with restrictions on Mr. Cengarle’s operation of a trust account for three years was appropriate in the circumstances. The panel ordered costs of $5,000 with two years to pay, taking into account previous costs paid, the fact that some allegations were withdrawn and the lawyer’s partial success in a previous disclosure motion.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Ms. Singh had been prosecuted and penalized three times by professional regulators or organizations for breaches or alleged breaches of their ethical standards, resulting in serious findings of misconduct. In a fourth proceeding involving a quasi-criminal prosecution, although settled by a peace bond, the underlying conduct involved participation in a misleading scheme. Ms. Singh did not show candour in disclosing all of the details of these incidents or her ongoing employment in her licensing application and subsequent investigations. The panel concluded that she had repeatedly engaged in serious misconduct in a number of different settings and had not demonstrated remorse as she repeatedly made excuses for, minimized, concealed and failed to take responsibility for her actions; she lacked candour and her ongoing conduct raised doubts about her integrity. Because it found that Ms. Singh did not meet the onus of establishing that she is presently of good character, the panel dismissed her application for licensing.
- 16/09/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Farid Arbi, Paralegal (London)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 7, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Milica Birkett, Paralegal Applicant (Oshawa)
A licensing hearing will be held on September 19, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
Darcy John Daoust, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 20, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Sang-Kyun Suh, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held from September 21-23, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on September 21, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Tracey Marie Resetar, Lawyer (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on September 23, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Simon Andrew Hildyard, Paralegal (Ajax)
Mr. Hildyard engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by committing criminal acts in relation to a young person who was his client as well as another young person who was not his client, and by providing legal services outside the permissible scope of practice for a paralegal. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $4,575 in costs to the Law Society.
Licio Edward Cengarle, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Cengarle engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain the security of his Personalized Security Package, failing to fulfill an undertaking, mishandling trust funds, operating his practice in a way that facilitated dishonesty or fraud, failing to supervise his employee, and failing to respond promptly and completely to the Law Society. His licence is suspended for eighteen months, for three years after which he may not open or maintain a trust account except one that is supervised by an approved lawyer. He is also ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Ms. Singh is not presently of good character, and so her licensing application is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Matthew William O’Neil, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society brought a motion for an interlocutory order suspending Mr. O’Neil’s licence to practise law after Mr. O’Neil’s former employer brought a complaint regarding allegations that he had: diverted client funds for services performed by the firm to his personal bank account; misled her and the firm’s clients about the status of immigration matters; and potentially forged documents. Mr. O’Neil’s former employer provided documentary evidence in support of all of the allegations, and while the Law Society’s investigation of these allegations is ongoing, Mr. O’Neil had only provided a partial response to the allegations to date. The panel reasoned that the evidence tendered gave rise to serious concerns about Mr. O’Neil’s integrity and suggested that there were reasonable and probable grounds for believing that there was a significant risk of harm to members of the public, or to the public interest in the administration of justice, if an interlocutory order was not made; risks would not be reduced by requiring the supervision of another lawyer, as the alleged misconduct took place under the supervision of a lawyer. Additionally, evidence of potential misappropriation suggested significant risk if Mr. O’Neil were permitted to handle trust funds, and representation of clients in immigration matters would be of particular concern because of the vulnerable nature of this client group (several of the allegations related to Mr. O’Neil’s alleged failure to serve and misleading of such clients). The panel found that allowing Mr. O’Neil to perform in-house legal work for his family’s corporation, if the corporation was informed of the allegations and evidence in the complaint, would likely reduce the risk to the public and not damage the public’s trust in the profession’s ability to self-regulate.
Mark Stansfield Trenholme, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Trenholme was found to have failed to serve his client in a family law matter to the standard of a competent lawyer by: delaying issuing the client’s application; failing to take meaningful steps to advance the client’s claims; failing to preserve the client’s beneficial interest in property; failing to keep the client appraised of the status of her matter; and failing to respond to the client’s communications in a conscientious, diligent and timely manner. A penalty hearing will be scheduled.
- 09/09/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Petar Lulic, Lawyer (Bronx, NY)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 2, 2022.
Patrick Glemaud, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 31, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Simon Andrew Hildyard, Paralegal (Ajax)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 12, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
A A, Lawyer Applicant (Undefined)
A licensing hearing will be held on September 12, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Sam Haghparast Rad, Paralegal Applicant (Thornhill)
A licensing hearing will be held from September 13-15, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kristine Genevieve Holder, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on September 16, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Tracey Marie Resetar, Lawyer (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on September 16, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Robson engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for six months after that, and he is ordered to pay $13,902.26 in costs to the Law Society.
Daniel John Thompson, Lawyer (Brighton)
Mr. Thompson engaged in professional misconduct by failing to give prompt notice to his insurer of a claim brought against him, acting in a conflict of interest, acting for both transferor and transferee without obtaining consent and acting for both borrower and lender without disclosing material information to the lender. His licence is suspended for one month, and he is ordered to pay $15,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Eric Matthew Letts, Lawyer (Nepean)
Mr. Letts engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. A reprimand is ordered, along with $2,162 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Elnaz Mazinani, Lawyer (North York)
Ms. Mazinani had previously appealed seven of nine of the findings of professional misconduct, and the appeal was granted in part regarding one of the findings involving whether she had provided invoices to her client. The parties were invited to provide written submissions on whether the penalty of a six-month suspension and the costs awarded by the hearing panel ought to be adjusted. The parties were also to file submissions for costs on the appeal. The majority found that the six-month penalty should not be reduced because the other findings of misconduct were the most serious allegations; the duration and number of clients affected were the same; factors considered in the penalty finding were not affected by the allegation regarding the invoices, and if the sole misconduct had been the invoice allegation, it would unlikely have resulted in a suspension. The majority reduced the cost award by $5,000 because some time was required to consider the invoice allegation. The joint submission of costs of the appeal in the amount of $19,000 was accepted. The dissenting panel member found that the penalty should have been reduced by two weeks, as the allegation that Ms. Mazinani failed to provide invoices as required was not so insignificant as to warrant no reduction in penalty; the successful appeal of this allegation reduced the extent and duration of the misconduct; and while encouraging rehabilitation, the penalty would still be severe enough to reflect the findings of lack of integrity.
Sandra Zaher, Lawyer Applicant (Windsor)
Ms. Zaher had been found to have engaged in professional misconduct, as she was convicted of three criminal offences related to preparation of a false refugee claim at the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, and based on admissions in an agreed statement of facts. Ten days after admitting serious misconduct, Ms. Zaher applied for reinstatement of her licence. The Law Society opposed the application. The panel found that the nature of the misconduct was serious and that Ms. Zaher did not show meaningful insight or accept responsibility for her actions. Regarding rehabilitation, she had obtained counselling but did not show preparedness for returning to the practice of law. There was no evidence of further misconduct. Although ten years had passed since the misconduct, the revocation of her licence had only taken place ten days before her application for reinstatement. The panel found that she had not met her onus to establish that she is currently of good character.
- 02/09/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Nahid Rahimi, Paralegal (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 26, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Daniel John Thompson, Lawyer (Brighton)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 6, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (York)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard from September 6-7, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference. A conduct hearing will be heard from September 8-9, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Lesley Mary Taafe, Lawyer (Oshawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 8, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Tracey Marie Resetar, Lawyer (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on September 9, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
Further to its order dismissing Mr. Diamond’s motion to withdraw his admissions of professional misconduct, the panel orders that Mr. Diamond will pay $7,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Sandra Zaher, Lawyer Applicant (Windsor)
Ms. Zaher is not presently of good character, and so her licensing application is dismissed.
Elnaz Mazinani, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Mazinani’s penalty of six-month’s suspension and additional professional development is upheld. Costs to the Law Society are reduced from $40,000 to $35,000. Ms. Mazinani is ordered to pay an additional $19,000 to the Law Society in costs of the appeal.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Andrew Robert Kerr, Lawyer (Barrie)
The panel found Mr. Kerr had: practised while suspended; failed to reply to communications from Law Society investigation counsel promptly and completely; failed to honour financial obligations by failing to pay a court reporter’s invoices; entered into an improper contingency fee agreement; improperly charged a client fees not provided for in a contingency fee agreement; and failed to report a potential claim against him to his insurer after a client’s claim was dismissed for delay. This was his third finding of misconduct, the nature and duration of which demonstrated a pattern of unwillingness to be governed. Evidence of mitigating factors was found to be insufficient, and so Mr. Kerr was found to be ungovernable and his licence was revoked. The panel also ordered costs of $52,215.53.
Frances Khakhan, Paralegal (Maple)
Adhering to a system that was followed by the lawyer who had employed Ms. Khakhan until the lawyer retired, Ms. Khakhan received settlement funds from WSIB which she disbursed in accordance with the instructions she received from her clients, who were the agents of the WSIB Claimants. The panel found that Ms. Khakhan did not confirm the Claimants’ instructions after receiving directions from her clients. She paid herself out of her trust account before rendering accounts. Furthermore, some accounts listed services of which there was no supporting evidence that the services were or could have been performed. The panel also found that Ms. Khakhan did not maintain her books and records on a current basis. The misconduct was serious and took place over an extended period, but Ms. Khakhan did not have a discipline record, and she had complied with her obligations, and so the panel accepted the joint submission of a six-month suspension and costs of $13,000.
Mark Elkin, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Elkin acknowledged that he failed to provide representations and information requested in relation to eight complaints. Absent exceptional circumstances, the panel found that Rule 21.6(4) set out the outcome of failure to co-operate applications; Rule 21.6(4)(c) applied if complete and satisfactory answers had not been provided by the date of the written hearing, whether or not the Law Society had made the determination by the time of the written hearing. Where it was unclear whether compliance had been achieved, there was little harm in waiting for a short time while compliance was assessed. The panel found that, though Mr. Elkin did not comply completely through inadvertence in this case, Rule 21.6(4)(c) provided for an indefinite suspension pending compliance, a one-month suspension and costs of $1,500. The panel found no exceptional circumstances and so Mr. Elkin was suspended for one month and ordered to pay costs of $1,500.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Bush had been suspended, but failed to respond to investigative requests in respect of three investigations regarding trust monies and bank records. He provided authorization to access his bank accounts but did not provide complete accounting records as requested or maintain up-to-date books and records. Mr. Bush acknowledged responsibility. A joint submission for penalty was provided and accepted by the panel, as the panel found the joint submission not unhinged from the circumstances of the case. The panel found that progressive discipline was appropriate, as this involved a second failure to comply, and decided that the proposed two-month fixed suspension was appropriate, to be imposed following an indefinite suspension linked to the fulfillment of outstanding requests. Costs of $3,500 were also ordered.
Shirley Joyce Virginia Henry, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Ms. Henry borrowed and repaid, $5,000 from her client. The client viewed Ms. Henry as “her lawyer” and the panel found an ongoing solicitor-client relationship existed between Ms. Henry and the client. The client was vulnerable and dependent on Ms. Henry. The panel found that Ms. Henry’s evidence was fraught with inconsistencies, and that she had borrowed money from her client who was neither a regulated lender nor a related person. Further, the panel found that Ms. Henry knew the client had available funds because she had acted for her on the recent sale of property; Ms. Henry breached her duty of confidentiality.
Despite prior disciplinary history related to failing to be on guard, Ms. Henry described herself as an affiliate partner of a fictitious investment company and encouraged the client to invest. She did not advise the client to obtain independent legal advice nor did she ensure the recommendation for investment was fair and reasonable. Numerous red flags were present at the time of Ms. Henry’s involvement in the investment scheme. The panel found that Ms. Henry had knowledge of the fraudulent nature of the investment company, as well as having fabricated a document which she provided to the Law Society during the investigation (and thereby failed to act with integrity). The panel directed that a hearing be set for penalty and costs.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
The parties filed agreed statements of fact and an admitted documents book in which Mr. Diamond admitted professional misconduct. The panel subsequently found professional misconduct, and the parties jointly submitted that the penalty should be a reprimand. The panel rejected the joint submission. Mr. Diamond then moved to withdraw his admission of professional misconduct. The panel concluded that an admission of professional misconduct that is voluntary, unequivocal and informed may not be withdrawn where a joint penalty submission is rejected. Mr. Diamond had been informed that the panel could reject the joint penalty submission, and was advised that it was unlikely that the panel would do so, not that it was impossible for it to do so. Mr. Diamond’s motion was therefore dismissed.
Charlene Dorothy Desrochers, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Although her motions had been brought without notice, Ms. Desrochers sought to have her motions heard in the absence of the public and to have the reasons anonymized to protect the privacy of her health information. The panel noted that the Tribunal is bound to uphold the open court principle. The panel concluded that Ms. Desrochers did not establish that there was a demonstrated justification for anonymization or excluding the public, as something more than “general stigma” is necessary. The panel reasoned that there are reasonable measures, such as redaction, that can be taken to ensure sensitive information not relevant to the issues is not canvassed publicly. Ms. Desrochers’ request for the motion to be heard in the absence of the public and for anonymization was denied.
Following the decision in Bogue, the panel concluded that a high threshold must be overcome for the Tribunal to order the Law Society to pay interim costs, and that Ms. Desrochers did not meet or overcome this high threshold; she did not establish that she was impecunious or that there were any special circumstances in her case, including not establishing a prima facie case of discrimination. Ms. Desrochers did not fulfill her obligations in seeking accommodation, she was not co-operative and was unwilling to provide requested documents or answer questions, and the panel was not persuaded that legal representation was necessary or that no other alternatives were available. Ms. Desrochers’ motion for the Law Society to pay costs for legal counsel of her choice was therefore dismissed. The panel directed that the costs of the motion be addressed by the panel deciding the conduct and/or capacity applications.
Abraham Barry Davis, Lawyer (Barrie)
Following a spot audit, Mr. Davis’ records revealed multiple transactions where he received a large amount of cash from a client. He admitted accepting the cash but said that he misunderstood the relevant by-law provisions. Given Mr. Davis‘ direct involvement receiving the cash, his misleading entries in his own books and records regarding the source of the cash, and his refusal to identify his wife during his first regulatory interview, the panel concluded that Mr. Davis was a knowing participant in the money laundering scheme. Changes were made to the books and records between the spot audit and the Law Society investigation. The panel also received evidence from an expert on the red flags of money laundering. Additionally, the panel found that Mr. Davis’ evidence was not credible; he had no explanation for many events and in other cases his explanations were not plausible. His attempts to resile from evidence appeared to be completely self-serving. Mr. Davis also clearly lied during his first interview. Mr. Davis deliberately misled the Law Society by answering questions incorrectly about cash received on his annual reports. A penalty hearing is to be scheduled.
Vaibhav Phukela, Paralegal (Oakville)
The panel denied Mr. Phukela’s last-minute adjournment request. Mr. Phukela did not respond to the RTA, so he was deemed to have admitted its contents. The panel denied Mr. Phukela’s request to withdraw the admissions in the RTA. It found that he provided services through impermissible business structures that lacked certificates of authorization. Mr. Phukela performed little to no work on most of the files and failed to contact any of the clients. He did not provide services to the standards of a competent paralegal. Mr. Phukela accepted retainer funds and failed to deposit them into a trust account. Additionally, despite a court order requiring him to do so, Mr. Phukela did not repay any of the funds. He also failed to maintain his contact information as he was required to do. The panel directed that a penalty hearing be scheduled.
- 26/08/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Peel)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on August 22, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Deborah Anne Humphreys, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on August 29-30, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Scarborough)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 31, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on September 1, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Eric Matthew Letts, Lawyer (Nepean)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on September 2, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Andrew Robert Kerr, Lawyer (Barrie)
Mr. Kerr engaged in professional misconduct by practising while suspended, failing to reply promptly and completely to the Law Society, failing to honour financial obligations, entering into a contingency fee agreement that failed to comply with the Solicitors Act, improperly charging a client fees, and failing to report a potential claim to his insurer. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $52,215.53 in costs to the Law Society.
Joshua Jaisimha David, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. David engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain books and records since 2019. His licence is suspended until he has brought himself into compliance, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $2,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Melissa Faye Bowen, Lawyer (Woodstock)
Ms. Bowen engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations. A reprimand is ordered.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Diamond’s motion to withdraw his admissions of professional misconduct was dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
There were no new reasons posted this week.
- 19/08/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Aliamisse Omar Mundulai, Lawyer Applicant (Vaughan)
A notice of appeal by the licence applicant was filed on August 17, 2022.
David Wynne Jones, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 16, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
A motion within two conduct hearings (22H-049 & 21H-153) will be held on August 22, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Matthew Adam Beau-Thane Carson, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 24, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Steven Donald Bezaire, Lawyer (Windsor)
Mr. Bezaire engaged in professional misconduct by acting on the sale of a property where he ought to have known he was being used to facilitate fraud, delegating legal tasks to a non-lawyer employee and failing to maintain the security of his e-registration diskette and pass phrase. His licence is suspended for one month, and he is ordered to pay $15,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Susan Jane von Achten, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. von Achten engaged in professional misconduct by failing to deposit funds into her trust account, appropriating funds advanced by her client and failing to be honest and candid and act with integrity. Her licence is suspended for four months. Costs will be determined at a later date.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Martin Christopher Schulz, Lawyer (Mississauga)
For the first time, on appeal the Law Society argued that the hearing panel did not have jurisdiction to hear the conduct application because there was no lay adjudicator on the panel. The appeal panel found that the Law Society did not satisfy the pre-conditions for allowing a new issue to be raised on appeal. There was no evidence explaining why the issue was not raised before the hearing panel. The appeal panel noted that the Law Society’s submission would have failed in any event. The Chair or Vice-Chair is not required to record or document the basis for exercising their discretion, nor are they required to notify the parties. Objections to the composition of the hearing panel should be brought as soon as possible in order to avoid potentially tactical claims after the outcome has been determined, and the appeal panel found that there was no timely objection here.
The standard of review is correctness on questions of law and palpable and overriding error for questions of mixed fact and law or far. The standard of review on penalty is whether the penalty ordered is clearly unfit. The Law Society’s submission that presumptive revocation is the required penalty for child pornography offences overlooked the lack of jurisprudential weight calling for this penalty. It also overlooked the suitability and flexibility of the individual approach to assessing penalty. The appeal panel did not find any error in the hearing panel’s penalty determination. The hearing panel balanced the gravity of the office with the other Aguirre factors, and so the Law Society’s appeal was dismissed.
Sattar Al-taee, Paralegal (Windsor)
The panel accepted that Mr. Al-taee had notice of the proceeding and determined to continue in his absence. The panel found that the Law Society made repeated efforts to bring Mr. Al-taee into compliance. Mr. Al-taee did not engage. He was subject to two prior orders, both of which he ignored. The panel concluded that progressive sanctions did not change Mr. Al-taee’s behaviour, which had serious consequences in stalling the Law Society’s investigations. The panel found Mr. Al-taee to be ungovernable and revoked his licence to provide legal services.
Sheema Hosain Ali, Lawyer & Nazim Clint Ali, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Findings Regarding Ms. Ali: Ms. Ali admitted the allegations, but the panel noted that this coincided with challenging and significant personal circumstances which impacted her mental health, and found that the professional misconduct stemmed from wrongs of omission rather than commission. It noted that Ms. Ali was co-operative with Law Society investigators and made efforts to seek healthcare and provide restitution to her clients. Based on these factors, the panel made a finding of professional misconduct and accepted a joint submission for suspension of licence for four months and costs of $15,000.
Findings Regarding Mr. Ali: Mr. Ali did not respond to a request to admit, and the panel found that the allegations set out in the notice of application were deemed to have been admitted. He was also impacted by the challenging circumstances involving his family, which led in his case to mental health issues and substance abuse, but his professional misconduct involved acts of commission that raised issues of integrity, and he was not co-operative with the Law Society in its investigation. Based on these factors, the panel made a finding of professional misconduct and accepted the joint submission that he be permitted to surrender his licence within 30 days, failing which it would be revoked, and costs of $4,000.
- 12/08/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Hafiz Khosa, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding non-compliance was filed on August 4, 2022.
Manmohan Singh Hans, Paralegal (Caledon)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 3, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Peel)
A motion within an appeal by the licensee will be heard on August 15, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Steven Donald Bezaire, Lawyer (Windsor)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 16, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jason Michael Ramsay, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 17, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Antoine Kheir, Paralegal (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 18, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Joshua Jaisimha David, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on August 19, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Khalid Aziz Sheikh, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Sheikh engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating $184,413.55 from a client’s trust fund. His licence is revoked and he is ordered to pay $15,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Martin Christopher Schulz, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The Law Society’s appeal is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Murray Delbert Stroud, Lawyer (Pickering)
Despite the fact that he knew wills existed, Mr. Stroud acted as if the wills did not exist in relation to two estates, and got appointed as estate trustee without a will. He failed to notify named beneficiaries of their status, misled the beneficiaries, and, in relation to three estates, he misappropriated funds and delayed making distributions and finalizing the estates for an improper purpose. He asked a beneficiary of one of the estates to lie to the Law Society and acted in conflicts of interest when he borrowed money from clients who were not regulated lenders, as well as misleading the Law Society by declaring otherwise on his annual reports, while recognizing that it was professionally unacceptable for him to have borrowed the estate funds. Mr. Stroud conceded that the presumptive penalty was revocation and he did not advance any exceptional circumstances to displace the presumption. His licence was therefore revoked as of January 17, 2022.
Laurentiu Ben Eliezer, Lawyer (Toronto)
A 2017 re-audit to follow up on prior deficiencies in Mr. Eliezer’s books and records found numerous deficiencies. There was then some improvement, but on review in 2019, compliance had again deteriorated. Mr. Eliezer would transfer funds out of trust by “feel”. His trust account was in a deficit position, and not all transfers could be accounted for retroactively. The panel concluded that the proposed two-month suspension was in the reasonable range, and so suspended Mr. Eliezer for two months. He was also ordered to close any existing trust accounts and, for three years following the end of his suspension, allowed to practise law only as an associate or employee of a firm approved by the Executive Director of Professional Regulation. In addition, Mr. Eliezer was ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
- 05/08/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Maurice Henri Gatien, Lawyer (Cornwall)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 3, 2022.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, Lawyer (London)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on July 4, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Ajaz Ur Rehman, Paralegal Applicant (Brampton)
A licensing hearing will be held on August 8, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within an appeal by the licensee will be heard on August 9, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Glen Edward Matthews, Lawyer (London)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 9, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on August 10, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Rhonda Fleming, Paralegal (Merrickville-Wolford)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 12, 2022 at 1:00 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Bush engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for two months after that, and he is ordered to pay $3,500 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Neil Lawrence Boyko, Lawyer (Toronto)
In 2018, Mr. Boyko was suspended for two-and-a-half months. In 2019, he was prohibited from practising real estate law and operating a trust account. In 2020, this was varied and Mr. Boyko was suspended on an interlocutory basis.
The panel found that Mr. Boyko should have recognized there were unusual terms and red flags in a real estate transaction. He made no inquiries and his testimony indicated a lack of knowledge or appreciation of his professional obligations. Mr. Boyko failed to identify and investigate obvious signs of possible fraud before and after closing. He also filed an inaccurate and incomplete compliance report following the 2018 suspension order, failed to close his trust account within the time allotted and had handled trust funds while prohibited from doing so. Mr. Boyko practised law while suspended during this time, as well as practising real estate law after being prohibited from doing so by the 2019 order. Additionally, he failed to comply with the 2019 order requiring him to close his trust account and provide proof that he had done so. Mr. Boyko failed to respond to or communicate with opposing counsel and failed to co-operate with Law Society requests for books and records, and failed to keep complete, reliable and current books and records. The panel directed that a penalty hearing be scheduled.
- 29/07/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Agostino-Austin Persico, Lawyer (Vaughan)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 20, 2022.Deborah Anne Humphreys, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
A notice of motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction was filed on July 20, 2022.Eric Matthew Letts, Lawyer (Nepean)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 27, 2022.UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Milica Birkett, Paralegal Applicant (Oshawa)
A licensing hearing will be held on August 3, 2022 at 10:00am by videoconference.James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
A continuation summary hearing will be held on August 3, 2022 at 10:00am by videoconference.Khalid Aziz Sheikh, Lawyer (Brampton)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 4, 2022 at 10:00am by videoconference.Peter Vadim Widz, Lawyer (Etobicoke)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 5, 2022 at 10:00am by videoconference.Susan Jane von Achten, Lawyer (Toronto)
A continuation conduct hearing will be held on August 5, 2022 at 10:00am by videoconference.Jonathan Shulman, Lawyer (North York)
A summary hearing will be held on August 5, 2022 at 10:00am by videoconference.ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Murray Delbert Stroud, Lawyer (Pickering)
Mr. Stroud engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating funds from different estates while he was acting as solicitor and trustee of those estates. He also failed to act with integrity, failed to serve the estates and acted in a conflict of interest. Mr. Stroud’s licence is revoked immediately He is also ordered to pay costs of $20,000 to the Law Society.Claudio Martini, Lawyer (Windsor)
Mr. Martini engaged in professional misconduct by borrowing money from clients. He also failed to serve clients and misled clients about the settlement of their actions. Mr. Martini misappropriated funds held in trust and continued to provide legal services while suspended. Mr. Martini’s licence is revoked.Robert Andrew Kominar, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Kominar engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond promptly and completely to Law Society investigations. Mr. Kominar’s licence is suspended immediately to continue indefinitely until he has responded to the investigator. Following compliance, he is suspended for one month. He is also ordered to pay costs of $1,500 to the Law Society.Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Oshawa)
Mr. McMackin engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. Mr. McMackin’s licence is suspended for one month. He is also ordered to pay costs of $4,693.50 to the Law Society.Theodore Lee Scollie, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
Mr. Scollie engaged in professional misconduct by failing to provide services in accordance with standards of competence and quality. He also acted where there was a conflict of interest, failed to supervise and instruct a clerk and improperly delegated tasks to a non-lawyer. He also failed to account and mishandled trust funds by removing them without first delivering a fee billing. Mr. Scollie’s licence is suspended for two months starting on July 21, 2022. He is also ordered to pay costs of $27,500 to the Law Society.Vartan Hogop Samuel Manoukian, Paralegal (Scarborough)
The panel found that the allegations against Mr. Manoukian were not established and the application was dismissed.Edmund John Craig Ticalo, Lawyer (Sudbury)
Mr. Ticalo engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations. Mr. Ticalo’s licence is suspended immediately to continue indefinitely until he has responded to the investigator. Following compliance, he is suspended for one month. He is also ordered to pay costs of $4,000 to the Law Society.Sarah Lynn Cluff, Paralegal (North Bay)
Ms. Cluff engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond promptly and completely to two Law Society investigations. Ms. Cluff’s licence is suspended immediately to continue indefinitely until he has responded to the investigator. Following compliance, she is suspended for one month. She is also ordered to pay costs of $1,500 to the Law Society.Matthew Douglas Feil, Lawyer (Waterloo)
Mr. Feil engaged in professional misconduct by failing to comply with an agreement as to the proceeds of the sale of a matrimonial home and its contents. He also mishandled trust funds and failed to treat the court with candour. Mr. Feil acted without integrity. Mr. Feil’s licence is revoked. He is also ordered to pay costs of $2,500 to the Law Society.Leon Wickham, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Wickham engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond promptly and completely to a Law Society investigation. Mr. Wickham's licence is suspended immediately to continue indefinitely until he has responded to the investigator. Following compliance, he is suspended for two months. He is also ordered to pay costs of $3,500 to the Law Society.REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Caitlin Eloise Gossage, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Gossage submitted 106 false insurance claims through her employer's insurer. She repaid the funds and self-reported to the Law Society. The panel found that she had failed to act with the honour and integrity expected of a lawyer. The panel was satisfied that the penalty of permission to surrender her licence was not contrary to the public interest. The misconduct was serious but there were also significant considerations which mitigated the penalty. She was also ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.Behdad Hosseini, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
The hearing proceeded in Mr. Hosseini's absence. He failed to apply money received as part of a mortgage refinancing transaction as instructed. In another transaction, Mr. Hosseini failed to pay the mortgagee and instead used the funds to satisfy other obligations and claimed some of the funds as his own. He also failed to fulfill an undertaking. Mr. Hosseini has been suspended on an interlocutory basis since June 2018. He was also subject to an indefinite suspension for failing to respond to an investigation. Both suspensions remain in place. The panel revoked the Lawyer’s licence to practise law, effective immediately. He was also ordered to pay $125,000 in costs to the Law Society.Patricia May Charlene Main, Paralegal Applicant (Waterford)
In late 2011, Ms. Main wrote a number of cheques from her employer’s operating account. She repaid the entire sum prior to her criminal trial and sentencing. She pleaded guilty and received a 12-month conditional sentence. The misconduct was serious but brief, she expressed remorse, and has successfully turned her life around in the intervening years. The Law Society agreed that Ms. Main had discharged her onus and is currently of good character and the panel agreed. The panel ordered that Ms. Main is eligible to be granted a P1 licence upon completion of the qualifications and other requirements set out in the Act.Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Toronto)
At the time of the hearing, Mr. McMackin was already subject to an interlocutory suspension. The parties disagreed as to whether the one-month suspension for the misconduct in this application should be concurrent with the interlocutory suspension or should follow it. The Law Society argued that if the suspensions are concurrent, the one-month suspension will have little, if any, impact. The panel explained that an interlocutory suspension is not a penalty order but a protective order. The panel concluded that the most appropriate approach is to start the one-month suspension immediately, despite the interlocutory suspension. Mr. McMackin was suspended for one month, starting immediately. He was also ordered to pay $4,693.50 in costs to the Law Society.Theodore Lee Scollie, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
In 2013, Mr. Scollie's client purchased a business and land from a share-purchase transaction. The vendors were represented by a senior partner of the same firm. Mr. Scollie did not recommend independent legal advice or discuss conflict of interest; nor did he review all of the necessary documents or make required inquiries. Mr. Scollie did not identify or advise his client or the bank of any existing issues and he did not report his errors and omissions to the Law Society or the insurer. In 2016, the client was selling the land and Mr. Scollie did not act to protect the client’s interests while the senior partner acted to prefer the interests of another party. Mr. Scollie did not report the senior partner’s obvious professional misconduct to the Law SocietyMr. Scollie admitted the misconduct. He has taken steps to improve his client management skills and the conflict of interest practice within the firm. The senior partner left the partnership. New staff were hired and new processes put in place. Mr. Scollie's misconduct was very serious and while the panel would have imposed a heavier penalty, the panel determined that the jointly-requested penalty meets the public interest test and would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute. Mr. Scollie was suspended for two months. He was also ordered to pay $27,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Gino Louis Arnone, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
Mr. Arnone's firm acted on both sides of a share purchase transaction involving a buy-back mortgage. Mr. Arnone fell short of the standards of quality and competence required to properly protect his client’s interests. In 2017, Mr. Arnone became aware that a significant mistake had occurred and that he and his firm had potential liability and yet he did not report this to his insurer. The firm continued to act despite obvious conflicts of interest. Mr. Arnone did not follow instructions given to his firm and was not responsive to attempts to contact him. The panel concluded that permitting Mr. Arnone to surrender his licence did not offend the public interest. The panel ordered that the Lawyer is granted permission to surrender his licence and pay $12,500 in costs to the Law Society.Vartan Hagop S. Manoukian, Paralegal (Scarborough)
Mr. Manoukian spoke with the complainant regarding scope of practice issues. The complainant told the Law Society that he was causing problems for her, monitoring her and making her feel unsafe. The panel assessed the credibility of the witnesses and Mr. Manoukian and in doing so considered the totality of the evidence presented. The specifics given by the complainant were inconsistent with the other evidence and her narrative shifted over time. Some aspects of the complaint lacked any particulars at all. In other cases, the complainant acknowledged that she did not know the context of what she overheard but that she assumed it was about her. The panel found that the Law Society had not established that Mr. Manoukian engaged in misconduct and the application was dismissed.Rhonda Fleming, Paralegal (Merrickville-Wolford)
Ms. Fleming failed to deposit retainer funds into a trust account, failed to bring a small claims action as retained, misled her client about the progress of the action and failed to respond to requests for updates. She did not provide bills or otherwise account for client funds. She eventually stopped responding to her client and withdrew from representation without good cause and reasonable notice. The panel found that allegations of professional misconduct were established and set a hearing to deal with penalty and costs. - 22/07/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of appeal by the lawyer applicant was filed on July 18, 2022.
Robert Anthony Watson, Lawyer (Burlington)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 15, 2022, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Mark Stansfield Trenholme, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 25, 26, 27, 28 and 29, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. each day by videoconference.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (York)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be held on July 26, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Matthew Douglas Feil, Lawyer (Waterloo)
A conduct hearing will be heard on July 27, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. each day by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Julie Ann Bell, Paralegal (Amherstview)
Ms. Bell engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with and respond to three Law Society investigations. Ms. Bell’s licence is suspended indefinitely until she complies and then for a period of one month. She is also fined $2,000 and ordered to pay costs of $1,500 to the Law Society.
Norman Alec Villeneuve, Paralegal (Ottawa)
Mr. Villeneuve engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with and respond to a Law Society investigation. Mr. Villeneuve’s licence is suspended indefinitely until he complies and then for a period of one month. He is also fined $2,000 and ordered to pay costs of $1,500 to the Law Society.
Gary Donald McQuaid, Lawyer (Woodstock)
Mr. McQuaid engaged in professional misconduct by failing to perform legal service to the standard of a competent lawyer, failing to deliver statements of account, failing to respond to communications from opposing counsel and failing to maintain the confidentiality of his clients and to safeguard their property. Mr. McQuaid is granted permission to surrender his licence to practise law. He is also ordered to pay costs of $4,000 to the Law Society.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Ms. Deokaran is ordered to pay costs of $60,357.96 to the Law Society.
Frances Khakhan, Paralegal (Maple)
Ms. Khakhan engaged in professional misconduct by failing to act with honour and integrity by failing to deliver settlement funds to three WSIB claimants and by charging fees that were not fair or reasonable. Further she mishandled trust funds and failed to account for funds held in trust. Ms. Khakhan failed to maintain her books and records and failed to maintain a sufficient balance in her trust account. Her licence is suspended for six months starting July 25, 2022 and she is ordered to pay costs of $13,000 to the Law Society.
Mark Elkin, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Elkin engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with eight Law Society investigations. Mr. Elkin’s licence is suspended for one month, starting July 25, 2022 and he is ordered to pay costs of $1,500 to the Law Society.
Gregory Leung Sing Chang, Lawyer (North York)
Mr. Chang’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the any proceeding to which the motion relates.
Aliamisse Omar Mundulai, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Mundulai is not presently of good character and his application to be licensed is dismissed. A timetable was given for cost submissions.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
The Law Society’s most recent motion for an adjournment was dismissed. The Law Society provided no time frame for the length of the adjournment saying only that the investigation must be carried out.
Ian Alexander McLaine, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. McLaine was found to have engaged in professional misconduct as he failed to comply fully and promptly with requests from the Law Society for material pursuant to an investigation. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission as reasonable. Mr. McLaine had expressed understanding that such requests should be taken more seriously in future and was co-operative. Mr. McLaine was reprimanded and ordered to pay costs of $2,940 to the Law Society.
Ramandeep Singh Gill, Paralegal (Caledon)
Based on an agreed statement of facts and Mr. Gill’s testimony, the panel found that he had engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain books and records as required by the by-laws. The panel accepted the joint submission of an indefinite suspension to continue until he has brought his books and records into compliance, followed by a 45-day suspension. Mr. Gill was ordered to pay costs of $1,000
Franklyn Scott Taylor, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Taylor has a discipline history including multiple findings of failure to co-operate. There are two ongoing conduct applications against him as well as an investigation currently in progress. The motion for an interlocutory suspension was unopposed. The panel found there to be sufficient evidence to show ongoing failures to serve and co-operate as well as failure of integrity and that there were reasonable grounds for believing that there is a significant risk of harm to members of the public or to the public interest in the administration of justice. The Lawyer was suspended on an interlocutory basis.
Ivan Mauricio Rivera, Paralegal Applicant (Gatineau QC)
Mr. Rivera was charged with mischief, breach of probation, breach of recognizance and possession of marijuana. He complied with the conditions of his probation order and has been sober since 2015. He took responsibility and apologized for his past mistakes and misconduct and completed his paralegal studies with honours. The panel concluded that the Paralegal Applicant has discharged his onus of establish that he is currently of good character and eligible to be licensed as a paralegal.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The Law Society sought costs of its successful motion for an interlocutory suspension of the Lawyer’s licence. The Lawyer did not respond within the time granted for submissions on costs. The panel decided that it was in the best position to determine the applicable costs for this motion and that There were no compelling reasons to defer the decision on costs. The hearing took four days and the Law Society sought less than half the tariff rate, given the hours expended. The proceedings were complex, and the issues were of significant import to the parties. Actions by Ms. Deokaran, such as serving a purported expert report at the last minute, lengthened the hearing. The panel declined to award any costs related to printing expenses as the Tribunal operates electronically to the extent reasonably possible. Costs were awarded to the Law Society of $60,357.96.
- 14/07/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Lorne Alex Farovitch, Lawyer (Montreal)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 8, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Frances Khakhan, Paralegal (Maple)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 18, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 19 & 20, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. each day by videoconference.
Claudio Martini, Lawyer (Windsor)
A conduct hearing will be heard on July 19, 2022 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Simon Andrew Hildyard, Paralegal (Ajax)
An conduct hearing will be heard on July 21 & 22, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. each day by videoconference.
Edmund John Craig Ticalo, Lawyer (Sudbury)
A summary hearing will be held on July 22, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Khan engaged in professional misconduct by knowingly assisting in fraud or dishonesty by his clients or associated persons. He withdrew trust funds and misappropriated funds. He improperly acted for both mortgagors and mortgagees as well as misleading or trying to mislead the court, another licensee and the Law Society. Mr. Khan undermined the integrity of the profession. Mr. Khan’s licence to practise law was revoked and he was ordered to pay $132,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Patricia Colleen Williams, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Ms. Williams was convicted in 2016 for incidents that occurred in 2014 and 2015. She received a suspended sentence and completed her three-year probation without incident. Ms. Williams acknowledged her past errors and was supported by her probation officer. The panel concluded that she is presently of good character.
Abtisam A Muslim, Paralegal (Thunder Bay)
The hearing proceeded in Ms. Muslim’s absence. Despite numerous letters and voicemails and extensions Ms. Muslim did not reply to correspondence from the Law Society investigator. The panel ordered an indefinite suspension to commence immediately and continue until the required responses were provided and then a definite suspension for one month. The panel also ordered a conditional fine of $2,000.
Alpesh Patel, Lawyer (Toronto)
Following an earlier interim interlocutory suspension, the hearing reconvened to hear the motion for an interlocutory suspension. Mr. Patel did not contest the interlocutory order. The Law Society was investigating seven regulatory issues including misleading clients, misleading his former employer, failing to serve clients, failing to report a potential claim to his insurer, providing legal services while suspended and a charge of fraud over $5,000. Mr. Patel conceded that the alleged behaviour warranted the interlocutory order and the panel agreed based on the evidence before it.
Peter Robert Nicholas Harrison, Lawyer (Meaford)
In October 2020, Mr. Harrison was notified of two investigations into his conduct. Partial responses were received in March 2021 and February 2022. He did not provide further responses until after the hearing started. As a result, the investigation was delayed by more than 18 months. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission and ordered that Mr. Harrison will be suspended for two months. A conditional fine was also ordered if the Lawyer does not complete a recording investigatory interview as required.
Greg Ling Yu Wu, Lawyer (Meaford)
Mr. Wu notarized a document not in the presence of a signatory. He claimed to have verified the signatory’s identity when he had not done so and tried to conceal his actions from the Law Society. The parties jointly submitted a suspension of two months was appropriate. The panel concluded that this was not so unhinged from the circumstances so as to require the joint submission to be rejected. Mr. Wu was suspended for two months commencing on January 10, 2022.
- 08/07/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
William Joseph Harry Bulmer, Paralegal (London)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 6, 2022.
Caterina Petrolo, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 5, 2022.
Lindsay Michelle Belovari, Paralegal (Kitchener)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 5, 2022.
Alec McLeod McLennan, Lawyer (Oakville)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 4, 2022.
Madloul Abdul-Amir Aissa Abbadi, Paralegal (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 30, 2022.
Stephen Michael Labow, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 29, 2022.
Joshua Jaisimha David, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 27, 2022.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (York)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on June 27, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Gregory Leung Sing Chang, Lawyer (North York)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard from July 11-13, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gary Donald McQuaid, Lawyer (Woodstock)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 14, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, avocat (London)
M. Hamza s’est conduit d’une façon qui constitue un manquement professionnel en échouant de coopérer avec Le Barreau concernant leurs enquêtes sur deux cas réglementaires. Son permis est suspendu jusqu'à ce qu'il ait répondu à toutes les demandes d'enquête et pendant un mois par la suite. Il est également condamné à payer 14 000$ de dépens au Barreau.
Matthew William O’Neil, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. O’Neil’s licence is restricted on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Patricia Colleen Williams, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Ms. Williams is presently of good character, and so is eligible for a P1 licence.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Susan Jane Von Achten, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Von Achten received $7,000 plus HST from her client on account of fees not yet earned. She twice requested $3,500 from her client for the purpose of paying first a retainer and second the remaining amount owing to a psychologist. The psychologist did not ask for or require a retainer and the total fees charged were $4,900. The panel concluded that Ms. Von Achten was not entitled to the $7,000 plus HST because she had not yet earned the fees or delivered an account. She also was not entitled to pay the first $3,500 to the paralegal assisting her or to use the second $3,500 for her own purposes. Ms. Von Achten also refused to refund the overpayment to her client, and so the panel found that she had failed to fulfil her responsibilities to her client honourably and with integrity. The panel directed that a penalty hearing be scheduled.
Michael Israel Rappaport, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Though concise, the panel found that the notice of application was in accordance with the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure. Mr. Rappaport attacked each allegation on a number of largely technical procedural grounds and, in effect, sought a summary disposition and/or a non-suit. The Tribunal Rules do not contain a procedure for this and the panel found that the evidence did not support such relief. The panel found that Mr. Rappaport did not meet his burden of showing that the proceedings were unfair or contrary to the interests of justice. He did not request particulars from the Law Society nor did he bring a motion seeking further particulars. The motion was therefore dismissed.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, Lawyer (London)
Mr. Hamza failed to co-operate with an investigation into complaints. His responses did not relate to the requested information and documents. The panel concluded that Mr. Hamza did not co-operate, and therefore committed professional misconduct. The hearing is to continue on the issue of penalty.
- 29/06/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Deborah Ann Williams, Paralegal Applicant (Whitby)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on June 28, 2022.
Kristine Genevieve Holder, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 27, 2022.
Robert Bruce Gordon Stewart, Lawyer (Bath)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 23, 2022.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, Lawyer (London)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on June 20, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
David Simoes Malgueiro Campos, Lawyer (Toronto)
A capacity hearing will be held from July 4-7, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on July 5, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing and a motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on July 7, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 7, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Robert Andrew Kominar, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on July 8, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Peel)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on July 8, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Brian Randall Mitchell, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Mitchell engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond promptly and completely. His licence is suspended for one month, and he is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
William Joseph Harry Bulmer, Paralegal (London)
The Law Society had met its burden of showing service of the notice and disclosure of the materials, and the proceeding continued in the absence of Mr. Bulmer. Mr. Bulmer did not respond to numerous letters sent regarding two investigations. He has a disciplinary history, including for failing to respond to an investigation. The panel decided to suspend Mr. Bulmer indefinitely until he has complied with the outstanding requests from the Law Society, and then for six months. Mr. Bulmer was also fined $2,000 and a further $2,000 was imposed if he had not complied with the outstanding requests by March 18, 2022.
Alain Timothe Mfudi Tayeye, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Tayeye failed to co-operate with an investigation into a complaint. Substantive responses had not been provided prior to the start of the hearing. Mr. Tayeye submitted that non-co-operation was due to medical issues that he was experiencing, though he did not provide evidence of the medical issues. Mr. Tayeye also continued to practise. The panel found that he had failed to co-operate and so engaged in professional misconduct. A penalty of an indefinite suspension plus a one-month definite suspension was imposed, with time given to provide complete responses, along with $7,500 in costs, to be paid within five years.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A hearing panel found that Mr. Robson had engaged in professional misconduct for failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation, and ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance, followed by a six-month suspension. Mr. Robson moved to stay the suspensions pending the appeal hearing. Among other things, he argued that the Law Society had insufficient grounds to form even reasonable suspicion that he may have engaged in professional misconduct. The appeal panel determined that at least one of the grounds of appeal raised a serious issue and also relied on Appeal Division jurisprudence to accept that there would be irreparable harm if the appeal was successful but the stay not granted. However, the panel also determined that Mr. Robson had not shown that the balance of convenience favoured a stay. The motion for stay pending appeal was therefore dismissed.
- 24/06/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Evan Abraham, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on June 21, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Claudio Martini, Lawyer (Windsor)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 27 & 30, 2022 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Milica Birkett, Paralegal Applicant (Oshawa)
A licensing hearing will be held on June 27 & 30, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, avocat (London)
Une audience sommaire de conduite est prévue pour le 28 juin 2022 à 13 h 30 par vidéoconférence.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Franklyn Scott Taylor, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Taylor’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Michael Anthony McKee, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
The panel was satisfied that Mr. McKee received proper notice and disclosure and the hearing proceeded in his absence. By the time of the hearing Mr. McKee had been continuously suspended for more than two-and-a-half years. He had been the subject of a number of complaints more recently. The panel found the evidence established all of the allegations against Mr. McKee. The Law Society submitted that Mr. McKee was ungovernable. Correspondence from Mr. McKee acknowledged this. The panel found Mr. McKee ungovernable and ordered the immediate revocation of his licence.
- 17/06/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Robert Andrew Kominar, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 10, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
William Ndze Fuhgeh, Lawyer (Ottawa)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on June 20 & 21, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 20, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
David Simoes Malgueiro Campos, Lawyer (Toronto)
A capacity hearing will be held on June 24, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Ramandeep Singh Gill, Paralegal (Caledon)
Mr. Gill engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain books and records. His licence is suspended until he has brought his books and records into compliance, and for 45 days after that, and he is ordered to pay $1,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Coe Hill)
Mr. McMackin’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Brian Curtis Smith, Paralegal (Kitchener)
The panel was satisfied that Mr. Smith had received proper notice and disclosure and proceeded in his absence. Between 2019 and 2021 the Law Society received 38 complaints from clients including about misappropriation, failure to report to and serve clients, misleading clients, providing unauthorized services, improper withdrawal of service and dishonourable or uncivil behaviour. Investigators sent dozens of communications; Mr. Smith failed to reply to most and did not provide complete responses. During a telephone conversation, Mr. Smith refused to answer questions and advised that he would not provide any further information. The panel concluded that Mr. Smith engaged in professional misconduct as alleged. The panel found there was an ongoing pattern of misconduct demonstrating a lack of respect for his professional obligations. Prior discipline had no effect, and Mr. Smith made it clear he was unwilling or unable to follow the rules of the paralegal profession, and so the panel found him to be ungovernable and revoked his licence to provide legal services.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (York)
The panel earlier found that Mr. Robson had engaged in professional misconduct. The panel considered the Aguirre factors and concluded that Mr. Robson continued to not co-operate and thus continued to frustrate the Law Society’s ability to investigate the alleged misconduct. Mr. Robson was not honest, open and helpful; he answered only what he chose to answer and engaged in abusive personal threats. Mr. Robson also had a significant disciplinary record, including past findings of failing to co-operate. The panel ordered an indefinite suspension, until he provided a complete response, and for six months to follow immediately after.
Sam Haghparast Rad, Paralegal Applicant (Thornhill)
Tribunal openness is essential to proper functioning. The party seeking to depart from openness must establish that there is an important public interest that would be put at serious risk by adhering to openness. Mr. Rad sought a not public order in respect of the details, dates and subject matter of past criminal convictions for which the Parole Board of Canada granted his request for a record suspension. The panel concluded it was in no position to assess the effects of a not-public order or publication ban, as much turns on the evidence to be led at the hearing and Mr. Rad cannot at this stage demonstrate that the benefits outweigh the negative effects. The panel dismissed the motion.
Brandon Keven Rooney, Lawyer (Stratford)
Mr. Rooney brought a motion to be allowed to disclose what transpired at the pre-hearing conferences. He advised that he intends to bring an abuse of process motion based on the Law Society’s change in position on penalty. The parties agreed the information is protected by settlement privilege. Mr. Rooney submitted that raising an allegation of abuse of process is sufficient to require an exception to settlement privilege. The Law Society argued that a mere allegation is not enough. The panel could not determine whether an exception to settlement privilege has been shown because there was insufficient evidence on which to assess the weight of the competing public interests at play. The motion was dismissed without prejudice to a further motion being brought with adequate evidence.
- 10/06/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on June 6, 2022.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on June 2, 2022.
Adelin-Bogdan Mocanu, Paralegal (Concord)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 1, 2022.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, avocat (Ottawa)
Un avis de requête sur la conduite a été déposé le 25 mai 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Martin Christopher Schulz, Lawyer (Mississauga)
An appeal hearing will be held on June 14, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
A summary conduct hearing will be heard on June 15, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Brooklin)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on June 15, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, avocat (London)
Une audience sommaire de conduite est prévue pour le 16 juin 2022 à 10h par vidéoconférence.
Matthew William O’Neil, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on June 17, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Franklyn Scott Taylor, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on June 17, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Ian Alexander McLaine, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. McLaine engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. A reprimand is ordered, along with $2,940 in costs to the Law Society.
Peter Robert Nicholas Harrison, Lawyer (Meaford)
Mr. Harrison engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended for two months, and if he hasn’t completed his investigatory interview by August 31, 2022, he is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine to the Law Society. He is also ordered to pay $2,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Sattar Al-taee, Paralegal (Windsor)
Mr. Al-taee engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond to the Law Society promptly and completely, failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations, and failing to provide requested Compliance Reports. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $4,327.50 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Melanie Gloria Christine Zopf, Paralegal (Scarborough)
Ms. Zopf’s licence was suspended from February 2018 to November 2019. During that time she worked as a law clerk at a law firm for a little over three months. The panel concluded that Ms. Zopf provided services to the law firm in breach of s. 4(1)(g) of the Guidelines for Paralegals who are Suspended or Who Have Given an Undertaking not to Provide Legal Services, though it did not conclude that the non-compliance was a knowing breach of the Tribunal’s order. The panel decided to suspend Ms. Zopf for three months, starting when all outstanding administrative suspensions had terminated.
Dion Radcliffe McClean, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. McClean was suspended between October 22, 2021 and January 22, 2022 by an earlier order of the Tribunal. The panel found that he breached the Rules when he communicated in the capacity of a lawyer on behalf of a client, prepared a lawyer’s certificate and other legal documents and placed himself on the record in a family law matter while he was suspended. Despite repeated extensions, Mr. McClean never filed the required compliance report, nor did he reply to Law Society requests for information. The panel ordered an immediate indefinite suspension pending compliance with the requests for information. The panel also ordered a four-month definite suspension, considering the misconduct, Mr. McClean’s prior disciplinary history and the principle of progressive discipline.
- 03/06/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Lee Charles Sammut, Lawyer Applicant (Kitchener)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on May 31, 2022.
John Paul Fletcher, Lawyer (Whitby)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 30, 2022.
Jonathan Shulman, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 27, 2022.
Sheyam Balamurali, Paralegal Applicant (Vaughan)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on May 27, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Peter Robert Nicholas Harrison, Lawyer (Meaford)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 6, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Aliamisse Omar Mundulai, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held from June 6-8, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Coe Hill)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on June 7, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Sattar Al-taee, Paralegal (Windsor)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 9, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ramandeep Singh Gill, Paralegal (Caledon)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 10, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Melanie Gloria Christine Zopf, Paralegal (Toronto)
Ms. Zopf engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by failing to comply with a Tribunal order. Her licence is suspended for three months, and she is ordered to pay $2,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Patricia May Charlene Main, Paralegal Applicant (Waterford)
Ms. Main is presently of good character, and so is eligible to be granted a P1 licence.
Behdad Hosseini, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Hosseini will pay $20,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Coe Hill)
Investigative powers were authorized into possible conduct unbecoming as well as possible professional misconduct. The investigator sent Mr. McMackin requests for information in the two matters. Substantive responses were not provided prior to the start of the application. Mr. McMackin submitted that the delays were due to his accountant as well as his health concerns. The panel accepted that some of the delay was due to the accountant but also that Mr. McMackin was not straightforward about the fact that his books and records were not up to date. The panel found that Mr. McMackin had failed to co-operate and so engaged in professional misconduct. The panel requested the parties’ positions on whether an oral or written penalty hearing is requested.
Helen Mary McCullough, Lawyer (Keswick)
Ms. McCullough admitted the misconduct. The panel held in this case that the exceptional circumstances were truly extraordinary and compelling and included the impacts of cultural displacement, Ms. McCullough’s efforts to overcome experiences of hardship, disadvantage and violence as a young person to become a lawyer, the significant stress she was under at the time of the misconduct and her ongoing service to an important community of clients.
Ms. McCullough misappropriated over $100,000 from her firm’s mixed trust account to pay the operating expenses of the firm. She reimbursed the trust account, typically within days or weeks of the withdrawals. Ms. McCullough’s books and records were also incomplete and did not comply with the requirements set out in the by-laws. Ms. McCullough has since corrected all the deficiencies in her books and records. The Law Society accepted that the circumstances are so extraordinary as to justify a disposition short of termination of her licence, though the parties could not agree on the length of the suspension. The panel concluded that an eight-month suspension was appropriate, as well as monthly reporting requirements relating to financial matters for the first year following Ms. McCullough’s return to practice. The panel also concluded that Ms. McCullough would be assisted by ongoing meetings with an Elder or Traditional Knowledge Holder. Her licence was therefore suspended for eight months, and additional reporting requirements were imposed.
Fariborz Haghighat Jou, Lawyer (Toronto)
At the end of 2009 TD Bank prohibited Mr. Jou from acting as its solicitor on future mortgage loans for the bank. Mr. Jou involved another lawyer to act for purchasers on real estate transactions that involved TD Bank, while he or his staff directed or oversaw all of the legal work. The other lawyer did not communicate or meet with most of his ostensible clients. Mr. Jou also failed to register a collateral mortgage as instructed and failed to report this potential claim to his insurer. The panel found Mr. Jou’s conduct to be egregious; however, it accepted that the joint submission was reasonable and ordered that his licence be suspended for eight months.
- 27/05/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Brian Anderson Callender, Lawyer (Kingston)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 25, 2022.
Melissa Faye Bowen, Lawyer (Woodstock)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 25, 2022.
Matthew William O’Neil, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on May 25, 2022.
David Simoes Malgueiro Campos, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding capacity was filed on May 20, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Andrew Robert Kerr, Lawyer (Barrie)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 31, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 31, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Patricia May Charlene Main, Paralegal Applicant (Waterford)
A licensing hearing will be held on June 1, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, avocat (London)
Une audience de conduite est prévue pour le 2 juin 2022 à 10 h par vidéoconférence.
Sam Haghparast Rad, Paralegal Applicant (Thornhill)
A motion within a licensing hearing will be heard on June 2, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Laurentiu Ben Eliezer, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Eliezer engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain books and records, and improperly withdrawing funds from trust. His licence is suspended for two months, he’s ordered to close any existing trust accounts, and a number of restrictions are placed on his licence. He is also ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Kimberly Anne Bates, Paralegal (Ennismore)
Ms. Bates failed to provide receipts for fees and disbursements paid to her. She misled clients about the progress of their matters and failed to respond to requests for updates. The panel concluded that there was no reason to diverge from the proposed joint submission of granting permission to surrender her licence.
Jean-Marie Langlois, Lawyer (Stratford)
The panel earlier found that Mr. Langlois had engaged in professional misconduct. The parties did not submit any additional evidence on penalty. The parties jointly submitted that a two-month suspension was appropriate in the circumstances. The panel found that the misconduct was serious and Mr. Langlois did not admit the misconduct or show remorse, but that there were some mitigating factors, including that Mr. Langlois and the client settled their dispute and that Mr. Langlois signed an ASF with the Law Society. The panel found the joint submission fell within the reasonable range of outcomes and that it was not contrary to the public interest to accept it. Mr. Langlois was therefore suspended for two months.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Isaac challenged the competency of the investigators and the scope of the investigation. The panel found that the investigators received and exercised proper authority to conduct an investigation. Mr. Isaac moved for a stay of proceedings despite an earlier order of the Tribunal requiring him to seek leave to bring any motion. The panel denied the motion. Mr. Isaac requested leave to reopen his case but failed to satisfy any of the conditions set by the panel in order to do so. The panel set out a schedule for closing submissions and Mr. Isaac did not make any submissions.
The panel found that Mr. Isaac attended court and advised the court that he was not suspended despite the fact that he was suspended. He also failed to co-operate with an investigation. In representing himself, the panel found that Mr. Isaac knowingly misstated facts in a statement of claim he filed naming a former client and her new lawyer as defendants. The panel also found that actions Mr. Isaac brought were motivated by malice and compromised his duty to act with integrity. The panel found that Mr. Isaac’s actions brought discredit upon the legal profession, and that he failed to account for the withdrawal of money from a trust account, failed to deliver a final reporting letter and failed to respond to his client’s communications. The panel directed that a hearing date be scheduled to address penalty and costs.
Kevin Roy Lawrence Martin Hope, Lawyer (Brampton)
The panel found that Mr. Hope had notice of the allegations, and the hearings and proceeded in his absence. A 2017 transfer of property was orchestrated without the complainant’s knowledge or permission despite the fact that she was the sole owner of the corporation that transferred the property. The panel found that Mr. Hope took no steps to verify the authenticity of documents, the names of signatories, the general nature of the corporation’s business etc, and that he delegated all work to non-lawyer staff. The panel found that by reason of his total lack of attention to his professional responsibilities Mr. Hope failed to be on guard against facilitating real estate fraud. Mr. Hope has no prior discipline and did not benefit from the transaction beyond his fees. The fraud had a significant impact on the victim who lost her home as a result. The panel found given his considerable experience as a real estate lawyer, Mr. Hope’s acknowledged indifference towards his professional responsibilities was egregious, and so he was suspended for four-and-a-half months.
- 20/05/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Brian Randall Mitchell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 19, 2022.
Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Coe Hill)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on May 17, 2022.
Sarah Lynn Cluff, Paralegal (North Bay)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 10, 2022.
Robert Allen Stewart, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 6, 2022.
Edmund John Craig Ticalo, Lawyer (Sudbury)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 6, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Marie Anita Lovell, Paralegal (Scarborough)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 24, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 24 & 25, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 27, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Peter Robert Nicholas Harrison, Lawyer (Meaford)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 27, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Andrew Robert Kerr, Lawyer (Barrie)
A conduct hearing of three files (21H-126, 20H-049 & 19H-129) will be held on May 27, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Rhonda Fleming, Paralegal (Merrickville-Wolford)
Ms. Fleming is no longer prohibited from practicing as a paralegal.
Azary-Zarik Matanov, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Matanov engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by failing to report to the Law Society that he had been charged with a criminal offence, mishandling funds, failing to provide legal services to the standard of a competent paralegal and failing to act with honour and integrity. His licence is suspended for one month, he is ordered to pay $2,500 in costs to the Law Society, and he is ordered to attend four hours of continuing professional development.
Abtisam A Muslim, Paralegal (Thunder Bay)
Mr. Muslim engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. The March 4, 2022 interim order is no longer in effect and his licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated. If he hasn’t cooperated by July 13, 2022, he is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine. He is also ordered to pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Jean-Marie Gerald Langlois, Lawyer (Stratford)
Mr. Langlois engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by three times failing to recommend that his client obtain independent legal counsel, entering into an oral contingency fee and failing to serve a client to the standard of a competent lawyer. His licence is suspended for two months, and he is ordered to pay $15,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Maria Frances Marusic, Lawyer (Windsor)
In 2015, after hearing how Ms. Marusic’s relationship with Mr. Martini had ended, the Tribunal imposed restrictions on Ms. Marusic’s licence. The panel found that she had misled the Tribunal about the nature of her relationship with Mr. Martini and thus failed to act with integrity. It further found that she had failed to assist in preventing Mr. Martini’s unauthorised practise of law and provision of legal services, and associated with and used the services of Mr. Martini without the requisite express approval of the Hearing Division. The panel directed that dates were to be set for a hearing on penalty.
Claudio Martini, Lawyer (Windsor)
Mr. Martini was suspended as of April 22, 2015. He admitted to repeatedly breaching escrow but denied misappropriation on the basis that the action had been assigned to him. The panel found that Mr. Martini had misappropriated funds and continued to provide legal services while suspended. The panel concluded due to the nature of the proceedings and Mr. Martini’s own contribution to the delay, the delay did not rise to the level of inordinate. The motion to stay was dismissed and the panel directed that dates were to be set for a hearing on penalty.
Francis John Chung, Paralegal (Toronto)
The Law Society alleged that Mr. Chung had failed to co-operate with four investigations. He was suspended in October 2019 for failing to co-operate with two investigations and in January 2021 he was suspended for 12 months following a conduct hearing. Because he had still not complied with the October 2019 order to respond to the Law Society he remained suspended at the time of this hearing. The panel found that the nature, duration and seriousness of Mr. Chung’s conduct was sufficient to suggest an unwillingness or inability to be governed by the Law Society. The panel noted that there was no evidence of mitigating factors and it therefore found Mr. Chung to be ungovernable; his licence was therefore revoked.
Azary-Zarik Matanov, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Matanov was charged in December 2016. The Law Society found out about the charges in June 2017. He received a written caution in 2018. He was charged again in April 2018. The Law Society found out about the charges in October 2018. Mr. Matanov admitted all of the allegations but one, and the panel agreed that the one allegation of threatening to get a case reopened did not rise to the level of professional misconduct. The panel reviewed the Aguirre factors and concluded that a one-month suspension was a reasonable penalty in these circumstances.
- 13/05/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Deborah Lee Hamilton, Paralegal (Hamilton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 5, 2022.
Ramandeep Singh Gill, Paralegal (Caledon)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 4, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Shirley Joyce Virginia Henry, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 16, 17 & 20, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Patricia May Charlene Main, Paralegal Applicant (Waterford)
A licensing hearing will be held on May 16, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 17, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ian Alexander McLaine, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 18, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Stephanie Nadia Colangelo, Paralegal Applicant (Port Colborne)
A licensing hearing will be held on May 18 & 19, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Rhonda Fleming, Paralegal (Merrickville-Wolford)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 19, 2022 at 1:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Ruth-Anne Dawn Avruskin, Lawyer (Orangeville)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 20, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Gregory Leung Sing Chang, Lawyer (Toronto)
The motion is adjourned. Mr. Chang’s licence is suspended on an interim interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Michael Anthony McKee, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. McKee engaged in professional misconduct by practising while his license was suspended, failing to report a potential claim to his insurer, failing to reply promptly and completely to Law Society communications and failing to co-operate with ten Law Society investigations. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Ivan Rivera, Paralegal Applicant (Ottawa)
Mr. Rivera is presently of good character, and so he is eligible to be granted a P1 licence.
Sheema Hosain Ali, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Ms. Ali engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain books and records, failing to maintain sufficient balances in trust, misusing trust funds, failing to properly supervise her staff and/or assume professional responsibility for her practice, failing to honour her personal undertaking to another licensee and failing to meet the financial obligations related to her practice. Her licence is suspended for four months, after which she may only return to practice as an employee of a lawyer, subject to a variety of terms. She is also ordered to pay $15,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Tarnjit Singh Aujla, Lawyer (Brampton)
Mr. Aujla engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by committing the criminal offense of uttering a death threat, failing to report his criminal charges to the Law Society, improperly interfering with the accreditation and licensing process of his former spouse and communicating with his former spouse’s counsel discourteously, uncivilly, unprofessionally, and in bad faith. His licence is suspended for three months, and he is ordered to pay $8,500 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Saad Gaya, Lawyer Applicant (Oakville)
The hearing proceeding on an agreed statement of facts, an agreed document book and the oral evidence of nine witnesses, including Mr. Gaya. The Law Society did not oppose the application. The evidence from the arresting officer, his parole officer, and others who assisted in or witnessed his rehabilitation all attested to Mr. Gaya’s good character. The panel noted that the past criminal conviction was serious and came about as a consequence of Mr. Gaya’s radicalization, but that the criminal conduct occurred in 2006 when Mr. Gaya was 18 years old. He was held in segregation before conviction, incarcerated after pleading guilty and released on day parole nearly ten years after his arrest.
The panel decided that the extent and depth of his rehabilitation was evidenced by his actions, starting during his incarceration and continuing thereafter. It found that the evidence showed that since engaging in violent criminal activity in 2006, Mr. Gaya had grown from a misguided youth into a thoughtful and caring person with a powerful desire to do good in the world. The panel found that he was presently of good character and ordered that upon completion of the qualifications and other requirements he was eligible to be granted a licence.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
An earlier panel heard a motion and determined that the allegations and materials set out in the RTA were deemed to be true and authentic for this proceeding. The panel found that Mr. Khan knowingly assisted in the fraud or dishonesty of his client in relation to a transfer of property, and that he failed to follow his client’s instructions. Mr. Khan was found to have misled his clients, preferred his own interests over that of his clients and undermined the integrity of the profession. The panel found that Mr. Khan’s use of his clients’ funds constituted misappropriation, and so directed that a penalty and costs hearing be scheduled.
- 06/05/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Mark Elkin, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 4, 2022.
Julie Ann Bell, Paralegal (Amherstview)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 3, 2022.
Cosimo Vecchiarelli, Lawyer (Vaughan)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 3, 2022.
Norman Alec Villeneuve, Paralegal (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 3, 2022.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, avocat (London)
Un avis de requête sur la conduite a été déposé le 3 mai 2022.
U-Sheak Koroma, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 29, 2022.
Michael Gerard Carey, Lawyer (Nepean)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 29, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Tarnjit Singh Aujla, Lawyer (Brampton)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 9, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Licio Edward Cengarle, Lawyer (Etobicoke)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 10, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, Lawyer (London)
Une audience sommaire de conduite est prévue pour le 11 mai 2022 à 10h par vidéoconférence.
Rhonda Fleming, Paralegal (Merrickville-Wolford)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 11, 2022 at 1:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 12, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kumar Sriskanda, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held on May 13, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Abtisam A. Muslim, Paralegal (Thunder Bay)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 13, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Laurentiu Ben Eliezer, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 13, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Nazim Clint Ali, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Ali engaged in professional misconduct by failing to act with integrity and failing to serve a client. He is given permission to surrender his licence and ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Michael William Ostroff, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Mr. Ostroff was changed with five Criminal Code offences in October 2020. The Law Society was advised of the charges by a member of the public. Mr. Ostroff said he wrote a letter on November 3, 2020 though it was not received by the Law Society, and he admitted that he did not report as soon as reasonably practicable. Also Mr. Ostroff was found to have misled the Law Society by failing to explain that there were two versions of his alleged self-reporting letter. The parties jointly submitted that the penalty should be a reprimand. While the panel explained that misleading the Law Society was of serious concern, it concluded that it would not be appropriate to reject the joint penalty submission in the circumstances, and so Mr. Ostroff was reprimanded.
Shahid Malik, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Evidence was provided regarding allegations of fraud, misappropriation and misuse of a trust account, and abandonment of Mr. Malik’s law practice. He also did not maintain books and records for his trust account. The panel found that there was substantial objective evidence that Mr. Malik had engaged in real estate fraud and misappropriation of funds. There was also evidence that he may have been using his law practice’s bank accounts improperly. Mr. Malik ceased all communications with the Law Society. The panel found that there were reasonable grounds to believe there was a significant risk of harm to members of the public, and to the public interest in the administration of justice, if Mr. Malik’s licence was not suspended, and so it suspended his licence on an interlocutory basis.
Charlotte Lynnette Swanson, Paralegal (Longford Mills)
The panel concluded that Ms. Swanson had been properly served and was aware of the proceeding. Ms. Swanson failed to co-operate with nine Law Society investigations by failing to provide a prompt and complete response to investigator requests. The investigations related to very serious concerns, if established. Ms. Swanson was still in default, and her ongoing non-compliance significantly impacted the Law Society’s ability to investigate. The panel decided to suspend her immediately, to continue indefinitely until she complied, and then for one-month thereafter. She was also fined $2,000.
Ki Shik Shin, Paralegal (Brantford)
The Law Society served a request to admit on Mr. Shin, who failed to respond. Based on the deemed admissions, the panel found misconduct as alleged had been established. Following a random practice audit and a follow-up visit, Mr. Shin was found to be failing to meet standards of professional competence. The Law Society made a proposal for an order under s. 42(4) of the Act, which was issued in February 2017. An audit in August 2017 found that numerous terms from the proposal order had not been implemented. Mr. Shin remained non-compliant at the time of hearing. Considering that the misconduct was serious and ongoing for some time, the panel imposed a penalty of an immediate suspension to continue indefinitely pending compliance with the proposal order, and then for a period of two months.
Xue Xun (Peter Xue) Cui, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Cui conceded that he had no defence to the allegation. Nine issues had been identified during a practice review. The matter was referred to the Professional Regulation division due to Mr. Cui’s failure to co operate with post-audit monitoring. Despite numerous extensions, Mr. Cui failed to respond promptly, completely and in good faith to the Law Society inquiries. The panel found no extenuating or exceptional mitigating circumstances to move from the usual penalty. Mr. Cui’s licence was suspended, starting immediately and continuing indefinitely until he complied with the requests, and then for one month thereafter.
- 29/04/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 27, 2022.
David Macleod Faed, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 26, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Sandra Zaher, Lawyer Applicant (Windsor)
A licensing hearing will be held from May 2-4, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ivan Mauricio Rivera, Paralegal Applicant (Gatineau, Q.C.)
A licensing hearing will be held on May 2, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Michael Anthony McKee, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 3, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Neil Lawrence Boyko, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings (20H-111 & 20H-048) will be held from May 4-6, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gregory Leung Sing Chang, Lawyer (North York)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on May 5, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Leon Stanley Wickham, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 5, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Behdad Hosseini, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Hosseini engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating approximately $1.2 million from his trust account and failing to fulfill an undertaking given to a purchaser and the purchaser’s solicitor. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $125,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Caitlin Eloise Gossage, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Gossage engaged in conduct unbecoming by submitting 106 false insurance claims. She is granted permission to surrender her licence, and she is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Helen Mary McCullough, Lawyer (Keswick)
Ms. McCullough engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating approximately $116,902.61 from her firm’s mixed trust account, and by failing to maintain proper books and records. Her licence is suspended for eight months, she is ordered to meet with an Elder or Traditional Teacher during her suspension, and a variety of practice restrictions will be imposed for 12 months following her return to practice. She is also ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Alpesh Patel, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Patel’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Todd Elliott Speck, Lawyer Applicant (London)
Following extensive pre-hearing proceedings, a week-long hearing was scheduled. Shortly before the hearing commenced Mr. Speck withdrew his licensing application. The Law Society sought costs. The Law Society argued that it incurred significant costs in investigations, pre-hearing litigation, and in preparing for the hearing on the merits. Further, it argued, Mr. Speck’s conduct was improper, vexatious and unnecessary. Mr. Speck submitted that there was no authority to order costs in a licensing matter, and that the amount sought was excessive. The panel found support in the Rules of Practice and Procedure for jurisdiction to order costs when a proceeding is withdrawn and also where an applicant causes costs to be incurred or wasted without reasonable cause. The panel found that Mr. Speck’s conduct resulted in significant delay and added complexity, and that he failed to communicate respectfully, contrary to Rule 5.6(2). The panel ordered Mr. Speck to pay the Law Society $23,888.88 within one year.
Diana Linda Stokes, Paralegal (Nepean)
Ms. Stokes did not discuss fees or a formal retainer agreement with her first client. After resolving the dispute, she and the client were unable to agree on an amount for her compensation. Ms. Stokes retained some of her client’s settlement funds. Following court proceedings commenced by the client, Ms. Stokes was ordered to pay the client. Ms. Stokes failed to comply with two court orders, and so the client began enforcement proceedings. Ms. Stokes then failed to attend an examination scheduled in the enforcement proceedings and, by the date of the Tribunal hearing, still had not purged the finding of contempt. The panel found that the amounts at issue were outside the scope of practice for a paralegal, and that Ms. Stokes did not obtain errors and omissions insurance until months after she began providing legal services. The panel decided that the joint submission of a one-year suspension was not contrary to the public interest; while Ms. Stokes had no discipline history and many of the issues in her conduct had been resolved, the misconduct was serious. The panel suspended Ms. Stokes for 12 months.
- 22/04/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Leon Stanley Wickham, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 20, 2022.
David Charles Oake, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 20, 2022.
Elnaz Mazinani, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 14, 2022.
Speros Constantine Kanellos, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 7, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Alpesh Patel, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on April 25 - 26, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on April 25, 2022 at 11:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held on April 29, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Sheema Hosain Ali, Lawyer & Nazim Clint Ali, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Two conduct hearings will be held on April 29, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ian Alexander McLaine, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on April 29, 2022 at 1:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Dion Radcliffe McClean, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. McClean engaged in professional misconduct by practicing law and holding himself out as entitled to do so while his licence was suspended, failing to comply with his suspension obligations, and failing to respond to Law Society requests for information. His licence is suspended until he has responded to the Law Society’s requests, and for four months after that, and he is ordered to pay $7,700 in costs to the Law Society.
Todd Elliott Speck, Lawyer Applicant (London)
The panel orders that Mr. Speck will pay $23,888.88 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Andrew Robert Kerr, Lawyer (Barrie)
Mr. Kerr did not dispute the factual basis for the allegations but said that his mental illnesses excuse his misconduct. The panel received evidence from psychiatrists and Mr. Kerr’s medical expert. The panel concluded that Mr. Kerr was capable of complying with his professional obligations and that his mental health did not relieve him of the responsibility to co-operate with the Law Society or require the Law Society to accommodate him in some way that was never specified. The panel directed that a hearing date be set for submissions on penalty.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (York)
The panel found that the Tribunal has the authority to decide whether the designated office holder had the requisite reasonable suspicion to decide whether a licensee may have engaged in professional misconduct and thus to require information or documents under the Act. Mr. Robson was clear in his communications to the investigator that he would not be providing further responses. The panel held that it was not up to the licensee to determine whether requested documents or information was related to the investigation. The panel concluded that Mr. Robson failed to provide prompt and complete answers to the investigative requests as he was required to do. The panel directed that a penalty hearing be scheduled.
Sheila Joy Stanislawski, Lawyer (Nepean)
Ms. Stanislawski brought a motion seeking an order requiring the Law Society to pay for transcripts required for her appeal of the Hearing Division’s decision revoking her licence to practise law. The panel found that she had not met either part of the test: an appeal with a reasonable prospect of success or detailed proof of an inability to pay for the transcripts. The motion was therefore dismissed.
- 15/04/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 12, 2022.
Peter Robert Nicholas Harrison, Lawyer (Meaford)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 11, 2022.
Gregory Leung Sing Chang, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on April 8, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Behdad Hosseini, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A conduct hearing will be held between April 18-22, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gino Louis Arnone, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 19, 2022 at 1:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 20, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Melanie Gloria Christine Zopf, Paralegal (Scarborough)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 20, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Caitlin Eloise Gossage, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct and capacity hearing will be held on April 21, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Michael Israel Rappaport, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on April 22, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Paul Brian Fox, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Fox engaged in professional misconduct by receiving cash from a client that he neither deposited nor accounted for properly, as well as failing act with honour and integrity by not charging a client HST or remitting the HST to the Canada Revenue Agency. A reprimand is ordered, along with a Spot Audit, and he is ordered to pay $6,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Franklyn Scott Taylor, Lawyer (Toronto)
The matter is adjourned to April 25, 2022. Mr. Taylor’s licence is suspended on an interim interlocutory basis.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Ersio Amendola, Paralegal Applicant (Whitby)
The panel noted that the law regarding costs of an appeal is well established. Here the panel dismissed the appeal brought by Mr. Amendola. The appeal dealt with the fundamental issue of a licensee’s relationship with the Law Society, namely whether Mr. Amendola met the criteria of becoming a licensee. The Law Society reduced its bill of costs and the panel allowed Mr. Amendola to pay costs in installments over three years.
Jonathan Bolton Barnett, Lawyer (Strathroy)
The panel found that Mr. Barnett had failed to co-operate with and failed to respond to the Law Society. The panel accepted the joint submission of a reprimand.
- 08/04/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Khalid Aziz Sheikh, Lawyer (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 6, 2022.
Mehrdad Pashangpour, Paralegal (Newmarket)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 6, 2022.
Christopher John Di Giacomo, Lawyer (Niagara Falls)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on April 1, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Melanie Gloria Christine Zopf, Paralegal (Scarborough)
A conduct hearing will be held from April 11-14, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Shirley Joyce Virginia Henry, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 12 & 13, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Dion Radcliffe McClean, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on April 14, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 14, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Ersio Amendola, Paralegal Applicant (Whitby)
The panel orders that Mr. Amendola will pay $4,875 in costs to the Law Society.
Brian Curtis Smith, Paralegal (Kitchener)
Mr. Smith engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with and failing to respond to fourteen Law Society investigations. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Jan-Lee McKenzie Hughes, Paralegal (Hagersville)
Ms. Hughes did not engage in professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming a licensee. The application is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Dan Ronen, Lawyer Applicant (Thornhill)
Mr. Ronen applied to be relicensed two years after being granted permission to surrender his licence to practise law following a finding of misappropriation of trust funds. The panel earlier found that Mr. Ronen had not met his burden of satisfying the panel that he was presently of good character. The panel noted that there was a difference in addressing costs between conduct and licensing matters and between an applicant seeking to be licensed for the first time and one seeking to be licensed again. The panel determined the outcome of the preliminary motion was, at best, mixed, and awarded no costs for it. The panel concluded that Mr. Ronen, having participated in a questionable bitcoin transaction after submitting his application, should have known that his application would be unlikely to be accepted. The panel noted that it was his participation in the transaction that led to the hearing, and so ordered that Mr. Ronen pay $25,000 in costs to the Law Society over two years.
Michael Allison Constable, Lawyer (North Bay)
The panel concluded that Mr. Constable had notice of the motion and the hearing, and that the matter could proceed in his absence. The panel concluded, based on a consistent and continuing picture of crisis shown by information received from a number of different sources, that there were reasonable grounds for believing there was a significant risk of harm to member of the public and to the public interest in the administration of justice if an order was not made. Numerous complaints were received as well as reports from opposing counsel and Mr. Constable’s former bookkeeper. The panel concluded that a suspension was required in the circumstances, and so an interlocutory suspension was ordered.
Jan-Lee McKenzie Hughes, Paralegal (Hagersville)
The panel concluded that the Law Society had not established that Ms. Hughes had engaged in professional misconduct. The Law Society argued that Ms. Hughes had submitted a letter to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal (WSIAT) that she knew, or ought to have known, was false, and that this amounted to professional misconduct. The Law Society further submitted that a negative inference could be made because she did not follow up with WSIAT after receiving its response. The panel noted that the origin of the letter was never determined, and that the Law Society was not concerned with who drafted the altered letter or how it came into Ms. Hughes’ possession. The panel concluded that even if Mr. Hughes knew the altered letter was inauthentic, writing to WSIAT to ask it to investigate the letter did not amount to conduct unbecoming. The application was therefore dismissed.
Behdad Hosseini, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
The Law Society moved to dismiss the appeal for delay. Mr. Hosseini did not file responding materials and did not attend the motion hearing. The panel concluded that Rule 17.4 does not restrict dismissal for delay only to appeals which have not been perfected. The panel also concluded that the public interest is in timely professional accountability and regulation, and so the motion was granted and the appeal was dismissed for delay.
- 01/04/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Baheerathy Sriskandakumar, Lawyer Applicant (Markham)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on March 31, 2022.
John Paul Corrent, Lawyer (Windsor)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 31, 2022.
Franklyn Scott Taylor, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on March 30, 2022.
Darcy John Daoust, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 29, 2022.
Cora Darlene Wilson, Lawyer (Nanaimo, B.C.)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on March 16, 2022.
Paulos Luizos, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 4, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Brian Curtis Smith, Paralegal (Kitchener)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 5, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held on April 7, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paul Brian Fox, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 8, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Ersio Amendola, Paralegal Applicant (Whitby)
The panel orders that Mr. Amendola will pay $2,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Xue Xun Cui a.k.a. Peter Xue Cui, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Cui engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $4,167 in costs to the Law Society.
Dan Ronen, Lawyer Applicant (Thornhill)
The panel orders that Mr. Ronen will pay $25,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Hezekiah Ho-Fai Tai, Paralegal Applicant (Markham)
The panel orders that Mr. Tai will pay $6,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Gayle Hennick, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel had earlier determined that Ms. Hennick failed to co-operate and failed to provide a complete response to the Law Society; while some materials had been provided, it had found that she was still noncompliant. The panel noted that a lawyer is obliged to respond to the Law Society and that public confidence requires it. The panel ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance to be followed by a one-month definite suspension.
Cecil Norman, Paralegal (Mississauga)
The panel had earlier found professional misconduct, and the hearing on penalty and costs proceeded in writing. Mr. Norman had complied with the outstanding requests so there was no need for an indefinite suspension. The panel found there were no significant mitigating or aggravating circumstances and accepted the Law Society’s submission that a one-month suspension was appropriate.
Hezekiah Ho-Fai Tai, Paralegal Applicant (Markham)
The panel earlier found that Mr. Tai deliberately made a false declaration on his licensing application, after which his licensing application was dismissed. The majority of the panel awarded $6,000 in costs, a reduction from the Law Society’s request for $8,000 in costs. The majority reviewed the Perrelli principles and concluded that $6,000 was appropriate in all of the circumstances, including that the Law Society’s request was for 90% of their costs. The Law Society was awarded $6,000 in costs payable over two years.
The dissent would have awarded costs in the amount sought. The dissent found that the Law Society presented a detailed accounting and disagreed that the panel should speculate on submissions the applicant might have made but did not as he chose not to make submissions on costs.
Jean-Marie Langlois, Lawyer (Stratford)
The matter proceeded by way of a written hearing as an accommodation. The panel found that Mr. Langlois did not recommend independent legal advice for his client as is required under the Rules of Professional Conduct. Mr. Langlois assumed a mortgage on his client’s home and also made various emergency cash loans to the client. He also did not disclose or explain to his client the nature of conflict of interest or how it could develop in the future.
In 2011 Mr. Langlois had entered into an oral contingency fee agreement with his client. Oral contingency fee agreements were not permitted at that time. The panel found that he had failed to serve his client in a competent manner when he accepted a settlement offer without instructions. The panel set out a schedule to receive written submissions on penalty.
Bogdan Antoni Kaminski, Lawyer (Toronto)
Following a disciplinary proceeding in 2017, Mr. Kaminski was subject to a practice review which revealed some client ledgers with negative balances. Mr. Kaminski had made more than 100 unauthorized withdrawals and used funds held in trust to pay expenses for clients, operating expenses or his personal expenses. While the panel found that there were mitigating circumstances, it was not persuaded that exceptional circumstances existed to depart from the presumption of revocation for misappropriation, and so decided to revoke Mr. Kaminsky’s licence.
Donna Marie Mackay, Paralegal (Peterborough)
Ms. Mackay worked with another paralegal on a number of matters, even after the other paralegal was suspended. She also misled a tribunal and her client regarding the other paralegal’s status, and stopped representing her client with no notice and failed to attend a teleconference on the client’s behalf. The panel found that the admitted misconduct was serious and might have attached a heavier penalty if not for the joint submission. The panel found that the joint submission on penalty fell within the range of penalties issued for this sort of misconduct and suspended Ms. Mackay for two months.
Granville Nolley Cadogan, Lawyer (North York)
The panel concluded that there were reasonable grounds to believe there was a significant risk of harm to the public interest in the administration of justice. The panel considered what order was necessary to reduce the risk and concluded that a restriction would be adequate. The panel found that much of the Law Society’s evidence was flawed and/or incomplete, and it was also concerned that extending the interim interlocutory suspension might result in exceeding the likely penalty should Mr. Cadogan be found guilty of misconduct in any conduct application. Mr. Cadogan’s licence was restricted so that he was permitted to practise law under the supervision of an approved licensee.
Charles Thomas Polanski, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
The Appeal Division had earlier dismissed Mr. Polanski’s four motions and his appeal. Because the appeal had been entirely unsuccessful, and was complicated by his four motions and his confusing analysis, the panel found that the costs sought by the Law Society were reasonable. The panel ordered Mr. Polanski to pay $12,700 in five installments.
- 25/03/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Oussama Djalaledine Hamza, Lawyer (London)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 24, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Susan Jane Von Achten, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 28-30, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Helen Mary McCullough, Lawyer (Keswick)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 29, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 31, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Theodore Lee Scollie, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 31, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on March 31, 2022 at 11:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jeffrey Gordon Alexander Burtt, Lawyer (Ancaster)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 1, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Leon Stanley Wickham, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on April 1, 2022 at 1:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Alain Timothe Mfudi Tayeye, avocat (Ottawa)
Une audience sommaire de conduite est prévue pour le 1 avril 2022 à 2h 30 par vidéoconférence.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Charles Thomas Polanski, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Polanski will pay $12,700 in costs to the Law Society.
Cecil Norman, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Mr. Norman engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended for one month, and he is ordered to pay $4,400 in costs to the Law Society.
Fariborz Haghighat Jou, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Jou engaged in professional misconduct by failing to act with integrity, failing to serve his mortgage lender client and failing to report to LawPRO the potential claim of his mortgage lender client. His licence is suspended for eight months, and he is ordered to pay $12,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Charlotte Lynnette Swanson, Paralegal (Longford Mills)
Ms. Swanson engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with nine Law Society investigations. Her licence is suspended until she has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and she is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine and $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Saad Gaya, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Gaya is presently of good character, and so is eligible for an L1 licence.
Martin Christopher Schulz, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The panel orders that Mr. Schulz will pay $18,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
James Cooper Morton, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Morton admitted to fabricating a divorce order and certificate, including forging the signature of a judge and a court clerk, and then using those documents to apply for and obtain a marriage licence. He pled guilty to one count of forgery and one count of bigamy and was sentenced to a six-month conditional sentence and community service. The panel found that Mr. Morton’s conduct fit the definition of conduct unbecoming, and accepted the joint submission to revoke Mr. Morton’s licence.
Elizabeth Eleanor King, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel found that, while Ms. King was improving, she had been incapable of meeting her obligations as a lawyer since her attempt to discontinue medication. Though it likely wouldn’t change conduct that was not under her control, the panel concluded that a suspension would make it clear to the public that her illness was recognized and that appropriate regulatory action had been taken.
The panel noted that licensee recovery is an important public interest, as is protecting individuals from threats to their dignity. The panel concluded that openness would pose a serious risk to those important public interests and ordered that redacted affidavits be placed in the Tribunal’s file for this matter.
Keith Stuart Shaw, Paralegal (Ottawa-Carleton)
Mr. Shaw admitted that he failed to keep books and records as required and has been working diligently to recreate them. The panel concluded that there was no evidence to support the allegation of failure to co-operate. Mr. Shaw was suspended indefinitely until he complied with the requirements regarding books and records, starting on January 30, 2022 instead of immediately. (This reflected the need to protect Mr. Shaw’s clients whose matters were scheduled in January after significant delays due to COVID.) Mr. Shaw presented evidence that he has avoided new retainers pending resolution of the application. The panel also ordered a one-month suspension to begin at the end of the indefinite suspension.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The Law Society brought a motion for interlocutory suspension pending the determination of allegations arising from 17 complaints received from former clients, opposing counsel and members of the judiciary which involved, among other things, unprofessional communications, false representations and affidavits, threatening a client that he would be deported while demanding more money from him, sending damaging correspondence about her client to opposing counsel, and failing to return client files upon termination of her retainer. Ms. Deokaran, who had been practising under interim restrictions that included supervision by another licensee, argued that restrictions would be sufficient to address any risk to the public or the public interest in the administration of justice. The panel found that the allegations were serious, as they raised concerns about Ms. Deokaran’s honesty and integrity, such that a serious risk of harm was established which could only be addressed by suspension. It therefore ordered an interlocutory suspension.
Elnaz Mazinani, Lawyer (North York)
Ms. Mazinani appealed the hearing panel’s ruling that she was precluded from relitigating a judicial finding that she had breached a court order, arguing that the panel erred by failing to consider that she had been blindsided by an affidavit filed without notice and denied procedural fairness in the appearance in Small Claims Court where it was determined that she had breached the order. The appeal panel found no error in the CUPE ruling, noting that Ms. Mazinani had not argued on judicial review of the breach finding that she had been blindsided and denied procedural fairness. The panel therefore dismissed the appeal.
Ms. Mazinani also appealed seven of nine of the findings of professional misconduct, arguing that: she had complied with the court order; the LSO did not adduce expert evidence on standards of practice to establish she failed to serve a family law appeal client; she did not breach client confidentiality as the information divulged was not actually confidential; the invoices provided to a client satisfied the requirement to issue accounts before depositing payments for fees into general; the failure to deposit trust funds for three weeks does not bring discredit to the profession; there was no evidence to support a finding that she intentionally misled the court and opposing counsel; and the panel wrongly held that an offer to mutually withdraw LSO complaints is professional misconduct. The appeal panel dismissed the appeal against all but one of the particulars, finding that Ms. Mazinani had provided invoices to her client which, although lacking in any detail, satisfied the client and the requirements of By-Law 9 to issue a billing.
Ms. Mazinani argued that the order for $120,000 in costs was excessive and punitive. The appeal panel found no error in the costs award given that the hearing took eight days, involved complex issues, the LSO was largely successful and that Ms. Mazinani’s conduct unnecessarily lengthened the proceeding.
Ms. Mazinani argued that the hearing panel formed a general negative impression of her and that this tainted its assessment of the case, which it approached on a global basis rather than considering each allegation separately. The appeal panel found that, while the hearing panel made a number of general observations that affected its overall assessment of Ms. Mazinani’s credibility and reliability, this did not amount to error and the hearing panel had properly analyzed each allegation separately.
Given that the appeal was allowed with respect to one particular, the parties were invited to provide written submissions on whether the penalty of a six-month suspension and the costs awarded by the hearing panel ought to be adjusted. The parties were also to file submissions for costs on the appeal.
- 18/03/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Dion Radcliffe McClean, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 16, 2022.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Scarborough)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 11, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Fariborz Haghighat Jou, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 21-23, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kumar Sriskanda, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held on March 21, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held on March 22, 24 & 25, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on March 23 & 24, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jeffrey Gordon Alexander Burtt, Lawyer (Ancaster)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on March 25, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on March 25, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Xue Xun (Peter Xue) Cui, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on March 25, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Diana Linda Stokes, Paralegal (Nepean)
Ms. Stokes engaged in professional misconduct by mishandling about $20,000, failing to serve her client to the standard of a competent paralegal, acting outside the scope of her licence, failing to obtain and maintain adequate errors and omissions insurance, and failing to discharge her professional responsibilities honourably and with integrity. Her licence is suspended for 12 months, and then until she has purged the July 23, 2019 contempt order, and she is ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Michael William Ostroff, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Mr. Ostroff engaged in professional misconduct by failing to report that he had been charged with a criminal offence to the Law Society as soon as reasonably practicable, as well as failing to discharge his professional responsibilities honourably and with integrity. A reprimand is ordered, along with $2,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Kimberly Anne Bates, Paralegal (Ennismore)
Ms. Bates engaged in professional misconduct by misleading two clients, failing to serve four clients to the standard of a competent paralegal, failing to deposit $1,695 into a trust account, withdrawing from representation without good cause and without reasonable notice to the client, failing to deliver settlement funds to a client, falling to discharge all responsibilities to a client and failing to notify clients of her own administrative suspension. She is granted permission to surrender her licence and ordered to pay $1,990 to the Compensation Fund, as well as $910 in costs to the Law Society.
Gavin McNeill Grant, Lawyer (Owen Sound)
The panel orders that Mr. Grant will pay $14,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Elnaz Mazinani, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Mazinani’s appeal is dismissed, except for the finding that she had deposited payment for fees into her general account without issuing invoices.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Mark Wade Smith, Lawyer (Kanata)
The panel found that Mr. Smith did not maintain general receipts and disbursements journals for the period in question though he had the source documents from which they could be produced. He declined to provide specific documents related to the bank account, submitting that the request was excessive. The investigator, and not Mr. Smith, had to determine what documents relating to the investigation were necessary and had to be produced. Mr. Smith had a prior discipline finding related to failing to maintain books and records in 2020, and so the panel suspended him indefinitely pending compliance with the requests for information, followed by a two-month suspension. The panel also ordered that Mr. Smith provide to the Law Society monthly receipts and disbursement journals for his general account for a period of two years.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
The parties filed agreed statements of fact and an admitted document book. The panel found misconduct involving very substantial advertising and marketing that intentionally misrepresented Mr. Diamond’s practice and expertise. The panel concluded this was long-term, wide-spread, intentional misrepresentation for financial advantage. It did not accept that the primary issue was marketplace confusion, instead finding that the principal issue was public confidence in the legal profession; the panel decided that public confidence and general deterrence required more than a mere slap on the wrist.
The panel reasoned that other cases were distinguished as transitional cases where the licensees had not had the benefit of regulatory attention. Further, Mr. Diamond’s misconduct was of greater extent and duration, and he received significant financial gain as a result. The panel concluded that a reprimand was so unhinged from the circumstances that it would bring self-regulation of the legal professions into disrepute and was otherwise contrary to the public interest and so did not accept the joint submission.
- 11/03/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Jim Koumarelas, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 8, 2022.
Steven Walter Junger, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 8, 2022.
John Jules David Somjen, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 7, 2022.
André Bluteau, avocat (Ottawa)
Un avis de requête sur la conduite a été déposé le 4 mars 2022.
Krystal Rose Sandra Moore (Mackay), Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on March 2, 2022.
Robert Bruce Gordon Stewart, Lawyer (Collingwood)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 1, 2022.
Jason Michael Ramsay, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 24, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Ian Alexander McLaine, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on March 14, 2022 at 1:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Alain Timothe Mfudi Tayeye, avocat (Ottawa)
Une audience sommaire de conduite est prévue pour le 14 mars 2022 à 14 h par vidéoconférence.
Kimberly Anne Bates, Paralegal (Ennismore)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 15, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jitendra Kumar Sood, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held from March 16-18, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Piero Perciballi, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held from March 16-18, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Charlotte Lynnette Swanson, Paralegal (Longford Mills)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on March 18, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Lauren Speers, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on March 18, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
William Joseph Harry Bulmer, Paralegal (London)
Mr. Bulmer engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for six months after that. He is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine, as well as a conditional $2,000 fine if he hasn’t co-operated by March 18, 2022, and he is ordered to pay $3,003 in costs to the Law Society.
Christopher John Di Giacomo, Lawyer (Niagara Falls)
Mr. Di Giacomo engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming in several ways related to representing lender clients with respect to loans secured by syndicated mortgages, as well as failing to provide legal services to the standard of a competent lawyer, postponing mortgages of his clients behind mortgages in which his father held an interest, and mishandling trust funds and breaching his obligation not to withdraw more money from trust than is held on behalf of the client. His licence is revoked, he is ordered to refund fees and disbursements, and he is ordered to pay $150,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Michael Allison Constable, Lawyer (North Bay)
Mr. Constable’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Jennifer Mae Dietrich Suzor, Lawyer (Windsor)
Ms. Suzor used funds by transferring them electronically to her firm’s general account as needed. She fabricated a client ledger and bank documents and swore affidavits supporting her false claims regarding the money. The panel made a finding of professional misconduct based on the evidence and the joint submission of the parties. Ms. Suzor submitted that “exceptional circumstances” is a standard that must evolve. The panel concluded that permission to surrender was a fair and proportionate balancing of the competing interests in this case.
Charles Edward John Macfarlane, Lawyer Applicant (Oakville)
The serious criminal misconduct with a gendered aspect took place in 2014 when Mr. MacFarlane was 21 years old. The applicant underwent counselling, attended various programs, and fully complied with the terms of his probation. The misconduct was characterized as one-time misconduct engaged in by an immature young person whose actions were affected by alcohol and emotion. The panel found it had strong evidence from those in positions to know about Mr. MacFarlane and his conduct, including a senior criminal lawyer. Therefore, the panel found Mr. MacFarlane to be presently of good character.
Patrick Leo Wayne Cusack, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Cusack sought further time to pay various costs orders. Having already received the maximum 52-week extension from the LSO’s Executive Director of Professional Regulation pursuant to s. 58 of By-Law 11, he brought an application under s. 49.42 of the Act, which allows a panel to vary a suspension or restriction previously ordered by the Tribunal. The panel determined that, as Mr. Cusack was no longer subject to any Tribunal-ordered (as opposed to administrative) suspensions, it had no jurisdiction to make an order under s. 49.42, which by its plain wording does not provide for review of costs orders. The panel therefore dismissed the application.
Leon Stanley Wickham, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
After the hearing panel allowed Mr. Wickham’s application for reinstatement, the Law Society sought to correct the wording of the order which required him to practise as an employee or “in association with” another licensee, although the panel’s intention, as reflected in its reasons, was that he practise “as an associate” or employee. The change sought was in the nature of a minor correction, consistent with the panel’s intention, and was granted. Mr. Wickham sought to remove the requirement that the LSO approve the employer or licensee with whom he worked, arguing that it was not part of the original order nor sought by the Law Society, and therefore was included in the order by mistake. The panel declined to make the change sought by Mr. Wickham, finding that it fell beyond the scope of a minor correction permitted by the rules, which do not otherwise allow for a panel to review, reconsider or vary its own orders. Mr. Wicham’s recourse was therefore to appeal.
Laurie Austin Dakin, Lawyer (Pembroke)
Mr. Dakin entered an ASF and admitted that, though unintended, his client had experienced some of his comments and a brief touch as sexual harassment. Mr. Dakin no longer wished to practise law, and the parties jointly proposed that he be given permission to surrender his licence, failing which his licence would be suspended for one month. The panel found the joint submission met the public interest test and made the proposed order.
Timothy Michael Kinnaird, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel was satisfied that Mr. Kinnaird received the notice of hearing and motion materials. Mr. Kinnaird’s e-mailed request for an adjournment was granted and an interim interlocutory suspension was ordered until the motion hearing resumed. Mr. Kinnaird did not attend the rescheduled motion hearing and it proceeded in his absence. The evidence raised concerns about his integrity, and the panel suspended him on an interlocutory basis.
Christopher John Di Giacomo, Lawyer (Niagara Falls)
The parties agreed that Mr. Di Giacomo had engaged in serious misconduct which included multiple conflicts of interest, misleading his clients and abdicating his responsibilities. The panel found that Mr. Di Giacomo was aware of what he was doing and actively participated in depriving his clients of their investment funds. It also found the jointly-submitted penalty to be clearly unconscionable, reasoning that no explanatory or extenuating circumstances were presented to refute the presumptive and appropriate penalty of revocation. The panel therefore revoked Mr. Giacomo’s licence and ordered that he refund fees and disbursements to listed clients.
Ioannis Vamvakidis, Lawyer (Vaughan)
Mr. Vamvakidis e-mailed the Tribunal acknowledging his failure to provide all the information requested by the Law Society and consenting to the terms of the draft order directing the immediate revocation of his licence. The panel was satisfied proper notice had been provided to Mr. Vamvakidis. He had a prior discipline history reflecting an ongoing pattern of misconduct; a 2017 suspension had been ordered to remain in force until Mr. Vamvakidis complied with the underlying requests, and that suspension remained in effect four years later. The panel therefore found Mr. Vamvakidis to be ungovernable and revoked his licence.
- 04/03/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Leon Stanley Wickham, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 1, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Abraham Barry Davis, Lawyer (Barrie)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 7-9, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Saad Gaya, Lawyer Applicant (Oakville)
A licensing hearing will be held from March 7-10, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A motion within a licensing hearing will be held on March 9, 2022 at 8:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Sheema Hosain Ali, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 9, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Nazim Clint Ali, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 9, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Rono Reza Khan, Lawyer Applicant (Mississauga)
A licensing hearing will be held on March 10 & 11, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Michael William Ostroff, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 11, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Xue Xun (Peter Xue) Cui, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on March 11, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Diana Linda Stokes, Lawyer (Nepean)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 11, 2022 at 1:00 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Gayle Hennick, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Hennick engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. Her licence is suspended until she has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and she is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Granville Nolley Cadogan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Cadogan’s licence is restricted on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The panel orders that Mr. Isaac will pay $18,400 in costs to the Law Society.
Frederick Barrie Wray, Lawyer (Brantford)
On consent, the September 20, 2018 order is cancelled.
Behdad Hosseini, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Hosseini’s appeal is dismissed for delay.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Paul DioGuardi, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Dioguardi entered an ASF and admitted that he engaged in professional misconduct by having clients enter retainer agreements that benefitted his firm to the detriment of his clients, depositing funds from clients into his general account prior to doing the work and issuing an account, and failing to take required steps on matters for which he was retained. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission for a one-month suspension, $2,000 fine and costs of $15,000.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
In 2018, the Hearing Division found that Mr. Robson engaged in professional misconduct. His appeal from that decision was dismissed in 2019. The Law Society cross-appealed seeking a longer period of suspension or revocation and asked that a term of the 2018 order requiring Law Society to communicate with Mr. Robson through his counsel be removed. The panel found that there was no palpable and overriding error and error in principle in the 2018 decision. The cross-appeal was dismissed and the June 18, 2018, and the order was affirmed.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The Law Society sought costs for Mr. Isaac’s three unsuccessful appeals of various interlocutory and misconduct findings made by the Hearing Division. The Law Society submitted the appeals were complex and unfocused, while Mr. Isaac argued that Convocation is not authorized to make rules on costs and, if it were, the amount sought was grossly excessive, and the LSO wasted money. The panel found that Mr. Isaac was wrong: the Statutory Powers Procedure Act does not govern, the Law Society Act does. Because the pre-hearing process was lengthy and extensive, and because Mr. Isaac relied on almost 100 grounds of appeal which were unfocussed and advanced a number of arguments that had no chance of success, the panel ordered Mr. Isaac to pay $18,400 in costs within 60 days.
- 25/02/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Kishore Subramanian, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 22, 2022.
Michael Allison Constable, Lawyer (North Bay)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on February 18, 2022.
Everett Ross Field, Paralegal (Hamilton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 17, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Behdad Hosseini, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A motion within an appeal by the licensee will be heard on February 28, 2022 at 1:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (York)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on March 1 & 3, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Michael Allison Constable, Lawyer (North Bay)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on March 2, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Rono Reza Khan, Lawyer Applicant (Mississauga)
A licensing hearing will be held on March 3, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. and on March 4, 2022 at 9:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Abtisam A. Muslim, Paralegal (Thunder Bay)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on March 4, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society’s cross-appeal is dismissed. The stay of the June 18, 2018 order is lifted.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Benito Bennardo, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Bennardo was unsuccessful in two motions and the appeal before the Appeal Division. The Law Society sought $26,000 to be paid immediately. Mr. Bennardo submitted that he should pay $4,00 over two years. The panel found it was a straightforward appeal, although Mr. Bennardo abandoned his appeal against finding only shortly before the hearing. The panel ordered Mr. Bennardo to pay $18,000 in costs over two years.
Ersio Amendola, Paralegal Applicant (Whitby)
The appeal panel considered whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hold licensing hearings after a licence has already been granted. The majority of the panel held that, although the Act was silent on the situation, it would be an absurd result if the appellant were able to remain licensed after being found to have deliberately lied in his 2008 licensing application, given the purpose of the Act to ensure that only those of good character could be granted a licence. The majority held that the deemed disqualification clause contained in s. 8(2) of By-Law 4 applied, even though Mr. Amendola had been licensed and providing legal services for 11 years with no issue. Mr. Amendola was free to bring an application for re-licensing, at which his post-licensing good conduct could be considered. For these reasons, the appeal was dismissed.
The minority would have allowed the appeal, reasoning that once a licence is granted, the licensing provisions in s. 27 of the Act are spent, and that there was no statutory basis for the proceeding. The minority argued that the proceeding was in reality an application for mandatory revocation of licence, which is contrary to the Act and Tribunal jurisprudence, and a draconian result which was up to the Legislature to enact if it wished, not for the Tribunal to create under the guise of statutory interpretation.
Although the hearing panel misapprehended the timing of some of the events, the appeal panel found that its conclusion that the appellant deliberately failed to disclose that he had been previously disciplined as a realtor was based on a plethora of other evidence, which did not include the alleged post-licensing failure to correct his licensing materials. The appeal was therefore dismissed.
Paulos Luizos, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Luizos was the subject of four different investigations and had provided some, but not all, of the requested information despite numerous requests. The medical evidence established that he was, during some of the relevant time periods, a person with a disability such that the issue was whether he had been unable to comply by virtue of his condition. The panel found that the evidence did not establish the existence of functional limitations during the material time that would have been a factor in Mr. Luizos’s failure to respond to requests made of him. In any event, the investigator had accommodated Mr. Luizos by granting extensions, allowing for oral rather than written responses, and attending in person to receive information, such that the point of undue hardship had been reached. Therefore, the panel found that he had engaged in professional misconduct. Mr. Luizos had a discipline history for similar misconduct which included a six-month suspension in 2014, but there were also a number of mitigating factors including his ill health and recent loss of a parent. The panel ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance, followed by a seven-month suspension.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Brooklin)
The panel had earlier found that Mr. Rapoport committed professional misconduct, as well as conduct unbecoming a licensee in the context of his involvement in marriage contracts between his mother and stepfather. Mr. Rapoport defended his conduct as well as co-operated with the Law Society in preparing for the hearing. The panel found that Mr. Rapoport’s conduct was harmful to his mother and also to public trust and confidence in the administration of justice. Mr. Rapoport’s licence had been revoked in other, unrelated, proceedings, though he had appealed that decision. The panel ordered that Mr. Rapoport be suspended for two years.
- 18/02/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Alain Timothe Mfudi Tayeye, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 7, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held from February 22-24, 2022 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Gayle Hennick, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on February 22, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Patricia Colleen Williams, Paralegal Applicant (North York)
A licensing hearing will be held on February 25, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Sheila Joy Stanislawski, Lawyer (Nepean)
A motion within an appeal by the licensee will be heard on February 25, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ruth-Anne Dawn Avruskin, Lawyer (Orangeville)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on February 25, 2022 at 1:00 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Whitby)
Mr. Rapoport engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a licensee by failing to serve his client and acting in a conflict of interest. His licence is suspended for two years. This suspension will only start if his revocation order is overturned; the two year suspension would occur after whatever penalty replaced the revocation. He would also be supervised for two years after his return to practice, and is ordered to pay costs of $54,000 to the Law Society.
Paulos Luizos, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Luizos engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond promptly and completely to four Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for seven months after that, and he is ordered to pay $13,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Ersio Amendola, Paralegal Applicant (Whitby)
Mr. Amendola’s appeal is dismissed.
Benito Bennardo, Paralegal (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Bennardo will pay $18,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Keith Stuart Shaw, Paralegal (Greely)
Mr. Shaw engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain books and records. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $3,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Alpesh Patel, Lawyer (Toronto)
The hearing of the motion for an interlocutory suspension is adjourned. Mr. Patel’s licence is suspended on an interim interlocutory basis.
Ioannis Vamvakidis, Lawyer (Vaughan)
Mr. Vamvakidis engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $6,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Michael William Ostroff, Paralegal (Toronto)
Despite numerous extensions, Mr. Ostroff had failed to comply with the Law Society’s requests to produce books and records by the time of the hearing. He admitted to professional misconduct by failing to maintain books and records as required by the by-laws. The panel accepted the joint submission of an indefinite suspension starting on February 11, 2022 and continuing until he had complied with the Law Society’s requests, followed by a one-month suspension.
- 11/02/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Xue Xun (Peter Xue) Cui, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 10, 2022.
Ajaz Ur Rehman, Paralegal Applicant (Brampton)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on February 10, 2022.
Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 8, 2022.
Marie Anita Lovell, Paralegal (Scarborough)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 4, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Alpesh Patel, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on February 15, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Charlene Dorothy Desrochers, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A motion within a conduct and capacity hearing will be held on February 15, 2022 at 12:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Kevin Roy Lawrence Martin Hope, Lawyer (Brampton)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 16, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Claudio Martini & Maria Frances Marusic, Lawyers (Windsor)
Two conduct hearings will be held on February 17 & 18, 2022 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (York)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on February 17, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ian Alexander McLaine, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on February 18, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
William Joseph Harry Bulmer, Paralegal (London)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on February 18, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Donna Marie Mackay, Paralegal (Peterborough)
Ms. Mackay engaged in professional misconduct by failing to prevent the unauthorized provision of legal services, misleading a tribunal and her client, failing to serve to the standard of a competent paralegal and withdrawing from representation of a client without good cause and reasonable notice. Her licence is suspended for two months, and she is ordered to pay $1,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Barnwell brought a motion for disclosure of all documents related to the investigator’s report and the consideration of his matter by the Proceedings Authorization Committee (PAC). He sought disclosure for the purpose of his stay motion on the grounds of abuse of process due to systemic anti-Black racism. The panel concluded that Mr. Barnwell had not satisfied the test for disclosure of PAC materials as set out in James, and so dismissed the motion.
Rishma Visram Gupta, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Gupta admitted that she engaged in professional misconduct as alleged. The parties disagreed on the appropriate penalty, as well as the timing of a suspension, if one was ordered. After reviewing the Aguirre factors, the panel considered that Ms. Gupta had stopped practising for many months in the context of the Law Society investigation, as well as the issue of retroactive vs. prospective suspension. The panel concluded that a two-month suspension was warranted and that it should be entirely retroactive, and so ordered that the two-month suspension commence on April 1, 2019.
- 04/02/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Patricia May Charlene Main, Lawyer Applicant (Waterford)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on February 2, 2022.
Jeffrey Gordon Alexander Burtt, Lawyer (Ancaster)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 2, 2022.
Sattar Al-taee, Paralegal (Windsor)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 1, 2022.
Franklyn Scott Taylor, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 31, 2022.
Edwin Theodore Watkins, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on January 31, 2022.
David Robert Gorman, Lawyer (Kirkland Lake)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 31, 2022.
Alpesh Patel, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on January 28, 2022.
Lauren Speers, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 27, 2022.
Abtisam A. Muslim, Paralegal (Thunder Bay)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 25, 2022.
Matthew Douglas Feil, Lawyer (Waterloo)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 25, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Shirley Joyce Virginia Henry, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held from February 7-11, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Rishma Visram Gupta, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Gupta engaged in professional misconduct by behaving inappropriately with a client during a visitation at the Toronto South Detention Centre, and by failing to fulfill her undertaking not to practice. Her licence is suspended for two months, and she is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Elizabeth Eleanor King, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. King’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Shahid Malik, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Malik’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Benjamin Odinaka Chukwu Mbaegbu, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Mbaegbu engaged in professional misconduct by failing to pay a Tribunal costs order, failing to maintain the integrity of the profession, representing himself as entitled to provide legal services while he was suspended, and misleading the Law Society. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $9,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Sandra Zaher, Lawyer (Windsor)
Ms. Zaher fabricated and presented a false refugee claim and was convicted of the criminal offence of fabricating evidence, as well as two offences under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission that revocation of licence was the appropriate penalty.
Gavin McNeill Grant, Lawyer (Owen Sound)
The Law Society sought revocation of Mr. Grant’s licence after the panel found he had: provided drugs and alcohol to minors; impregnated an underaged former client who was a Crown ward; sexually assaulted an employee at the firm where he worked; sexually propositioned a potential client; and assaulted a domestic partner, among other things. The panel, describing the misconduct as the worst kind, being exploitive and predatory against vulnerable individuals, concluded that revocation was necessary to protect the public and public confidence in the integrity of the professions.
Benjamin Odinaka Chukwu Mbaegbu, Paralegal (Toronto)
The Law Society sought revocation of Mr. Mbaegbu’s licence after the panel found he had: failed to pay a Tribunal costs order; failed to remove his office signage while suspended; held himself out as entitled to practise while suspended; and twice made false claims to the Law Society about his compliance with the requirements of suspended paralegals. The panel noted this was the third finding of misconduct in a short time, the nature of which demonstrated a pattern of unwillingness to be governed, and so, there being no evidence in mitigation, Mr. Mbaegbu was found to be ungovernable and his licence was revoked. The panel also ordered costs of $9,000 with two years to pay.
- 28/01/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Scarborough)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on January 24, 2022.
Frederick Barrie Wray, Lawyer (Brantford)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on January 24, 2022.
Shahid Malik, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on January 21, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Azary-Zarik Matanov, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 2, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Elizabeth Eleanor King, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on February 3, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (York)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on February 4, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ruth-Anne Dawn Avruskin, Lawyer (Orangeville)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on February 4, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
AA, Lawyer Applicant (Undefined)
The panel ordered that the name of the respondent, as well as certain parties who may be impacted, be anonymized. Anyone who has accessed the existing Tribunal file is prohibited from communicating, broadcasting or transmitting identifying information about the anonymized parties.
Mark Wade Smith, Lawyer (Kanata)
Mr. Smith engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain receipts and disbursement journals, as well as failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for two months after that, and he is ordered provide the Law Society monthly receipts and disbursement journals for the following two years. He is also ordered to pay $4,691.50 in costs to the Law Society.
Ki Shik Shin, Paralegal (Brantford)
Mr. Shin failed to comply with several terms of a Tribunal order. His licence is suspended until he has provided proof that he has fully co-operated, and for two months after that, and he is ordered to pay $15,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Jonathon Bolton Barnett, Lawyer (Strathroy)
Mr. Barnett engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. A reprimand is ordered, along with $7,500 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Dan Ronen, Lawyer Applicant (Thornhill)
In January 2017, Mr. Ronen surrendered his licence pursuant to a Tribunal order following a hearing which found that he had misappropriated trust funds. He applied for his licence in February 2019 and during its investigation the Law Society became aware of his involvement in a fraudulent transaction in February 2020. The Law Society did not allege that he was a participant in the fraud but that it raised serious questions about his ethics and integrity. The panel concluded that Mr. Ronen had not met the burden of showing that he was presently of good character, and so his licensing application was dismissed.
Gayle Hennick, Lawyer (Toronto)
Several concerns were identified following a routine spot audit in 2018. The panel found that Ms. Hennick had an ongoing professional duty to assist the Law Society in its investigation and that a mistaken belief that an investigation is unlawful could not alone justify a failure to fulfill professional obligations. The panel found failure to co-operate and directed that a date be set to deal with penalty and costs.
AA, Lawyer Applicant (Undefined)
The applicant sought to be licensed as a lawyer and was referred for a good character hearing due to his past misconduct, which involved the sexual abuse of children, including his eldest daughter. The applicant brought a motion that he and his children be anonymized in the proceedings and that the details of his past misconduct be made not public, as the children were not yet aware of the misconduct (the eldest daughter had no memory of it) and learning of it in the context of his licensing application would cause them psychological harm. The Law Society was agreeable to anonymizing the children and other victims but not the applicant, arguing that: (a) his interest in avoiding publicity was not an important public interest; and (b) the claim of harm to the children was speculative. The panel, noting the special protection afforded to children under Canadian law, held that: (a) preventing collateral psychological harm to children is an important public interest; and (b) the risk of harm can be established, in the absence of empirical evidence, by applying reason and logic. The test from Sherman Estates, 2021 SCC 25 having been met, the panel considered the least restrictive means of minimizing the risk and held that anonymizing the children and the parents in combination with a publication ban on any identifying information would protect the children while leaving the important issues and findings on the good character hearing transparent and accessible to the public.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Brooklin)
Mr. Rapoport sought to resume his family law practice pending his appeal of the decision to revoke his licence. The panel concluded that it was not clear that he had serious grounds of appeal, nor did he satisfy the panel that the irreparable harm requirement was met. The panel concluded that public protection and public confidence in the professions outweighed the weak evidence put forward about prejudice to specific clients, and so it dismissed the motion.
- 21/01/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Martin Christopher Schulz, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of appeal by the Law Society was filed on January 14, 2022.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Andrew Robert Kerr, Lawyer (Barrie)
Three conduct hearings (19H-129, 20H-049 & 21H-126) will be held on January 24, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Mark Wade Smith, Lawyer (Kanata)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on January 25, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ki Shik Shin, Paralegal (Brantford)
A non-compliance hearing will be held on January 25, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Vaibhav Phukela, Paralegal (Oakville)
A conduct hearing will be held on January 26, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Charlene Dorothy Desrochers, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A motion within a conduct and capacity hearing will be held on January 27, 2022 at 11:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
John Douglas King, Lawyer (Port Elgin)
The panel orders that Mr. King will pay $12,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Dan Ronen, Lawyer Applicant (Thornhill)
Mr. Ronen is not presently of good character, and so his licensing application is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Mark Aaron Phillips, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society initiated both a capacity and a conduct application against Mr. Phillips after he, in separate incidents in the fall of 2017, assaulted a man in a parking lot with a baseball bat and threatened to go “thermo nuclear” on a shopping centre. After a number of assessments of Mr. Phillips by forensic psychiatrists, the parties agreed that he had been incapacitated due to illness from January 2018 to December 2020, during a which a further incident of vandalism and threatening behaviour had taken place. The parties jointly proposed a detailed treatment plan with strict conditions that would allow Mr. Phillips to resume practice, which the panel accepted. As to the misconduct application, the Law Society argued that Mr. Phillips was not incapacitated in the fall of 2017, in that his delusional behaviour had been caused by voluntary marijuana use, and therefore a finding of misconduct was justified in relation to the earlier incidents. The panel, reviewing the medical evidence, found that although Mr. Phillips’ delusional behaviour was exacerbated by substance use, it stemmed from psychosis, a recognized mental illness and therefore he was incapacitated during the earlier incidents as well. It therefore dismissed the conduct application.
Nader Fathi, Paralegal (Toronto)
The panel accepted the Law Society’s submissions that costs of $13,275 were appropriate, being at the low end of the range for similar hearings.
Thomas Michael Harris, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
Mr. Harris admitted that during a period of at least 10 years, from 2007 to 2017, and with respect to 15 clients, he failed in his duty to those clients to be honest, candid and act with integrity. This included not commencing actions when retained to do so and lying to his clients about the status of the files, failing to return phone calls or meet with clients, and failing to take necessary steps in proceedings that were started. Mr. Harris also failed to advise a client about a judgment awarded against him or the debt owed as a result. Mr. Harris gave evidence that his behaviour in these fifteen cases resulted from personal issues he experienced that affected his mental health. The medical report noted that Mr. Harris used maladaptive and suboptimal coping strategies but these are neither symptoms of nor caused by the adjustment disorder. The panel confirmed that it is a defence to professional misconduct if a licensee is not able to comply with the Rules of Professional Conduct because of physical or mental illness, but it further concluded that a licensee must show a connection between the disability and the adverse treatment. Because Mr. Harris did not establish this connection, the panel directed the Tribunal Office to fix a date for a hearing with respect to penalty.
Dion Radcliffe McClean, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. McClean entered an agreed statement of facts and acknowledged that he engaged in professional misconduct when he accepted payment for legal fees directly from a client (contrary to his employment and contract agreements) and failed to take necessary litigation steps in a timely manner. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission for a three-month suspension and reimbursement of $540 to the client.
John Douglas King, Lawyer (Port Elgin)
Mr. King entered an agreed statement of facts and acknowledged that he engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by: i) failing to record cash payments and in doing so depriving his law partner of her share of firm profits; ii) pre-taking and taking excessive and unauthorized fees for executor compensation; iii) committing sexual assault against a client and failing to report the criminal charge to the Law Society. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission that Mr. King be permitted to surrender his licence.
- 07/01/2022
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Caleesis M. Telesh, Lawyer Applicant (Whitby)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on January 5, 2022.
Margaret Mary Osadet, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 5, 2022.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, avocat (Ottawa)
Un avis d’appel a été déposé par l’avocat le 22 décembre 2021.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on December 17, 2021.
Sam Haghparast Rad, Paralegal Applicant (Thornhill)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on December 13, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Ioannis Vamvakidis, Lawyer (Vaughan)
A conduct hearing will be held on January 11, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Charles Edward John Macfarlane, Lawyer Applicant (Oakville)
A licensing hearing will be held on January 11 & 13, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Michael William Ostroff, Paralegal (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on January 12, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
James Cooper Morton, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A conduct hearing will be held on January 12, 2022 at 11:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Charlene Dorothy Desrochers, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A conduct and capacity hearing will be held on January 14, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Nader Fathi, Paralegal (North York)
Mr. Fathi engaged in professional misconduct by failing to act with honour and integrity and failing to act with civility. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $9,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Ian Jerrold Collins, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Collins will pay $6,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Martin Christopher Schulz, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Schulz engaged in conduct unbecoming a licensee by committing the criminal offense of child pornography. His licence is restricted, and he is suspended for nine months.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Ms. Deokaran’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis.
John Douglas King, Lawyer (Port Elgin)
Mr. King engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a licensee by receiving cash payments which he failed to deposit into the firm’s bank account and to enter into his books and records, several instances of failing to act with integrity, committing the criminal offence of sexual assault against his client and failing to inform the Law Society after being charged with sexual assault against his client. He is given permission to surrender his licence. The issue of costs is reserved.
Rhonda Fleming, Paralegal (Merrickville-Wolford)
The hearing is adjourned for six weeks.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Diamond’s recusal motion is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Thomas William Gordon Pratt, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society wrote several times to Mr. Pratt, who only responded incompletely, if at all. A spot audit disclosed that he had not kept his books and records current. Mr. Pratt withdrew funds from trust on numerous occasions before delivering accounts, paid personal and busines expenses from his mixed trust accounts, maintained a personal trust ledger within the trust accounts, and, when the personal trust ledger was overdrawn, he took monies held in trust for clients for his own benefit. Mr. Pratt did not maintain proper books and records for the estate and he took compensation even though one of the beneficiaries did not have the capacity to approve this. The admitted misconduct was extremely serious and pervasive. The panel noted that there were mitigating factors which informed the joint submission to surrender his licence instead of revoking it, including his age and that he had practised for over 50 years without any discipline history. Evidence was also given to physical and medical disabilities. Mr. Pratt was co-operative throughout the hearing. The panel concluded that the joint submission would not cause a reasonably-informed person to believe that the proper functioning of the professional discipline system had broken down, and so Mr. Pratt was granted permission to surrender his licence.
Kenneth Robert Dunham, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Dunham provided most of the outstanding information shortly before the hearing. The typical penalty for a first finding of misconduct is a reprimand. There was no prior disciplinary record, the parties entered into an ASF and there was a joint submission. Costs were contested. The Law Society claimed costs of $15,000, a high figure for a half-day hearing. The Law Society submitted there were three investigations and two applications and substantial disclosure. There were also earlier adjournments and changes of counsel. Mr. Duhnam argued that he should not be penalized for providing the volume of documents that were asked for. Mr. Dunham submitted that the range of costs for a summary hearing was between $2,000 and $5,000. The panel assessed the proper range for this case as around $6,000 to $8,000. Mr. Dunham was reprimanded and costs of $7,500 were ordered.
Sheila Joy Stanislawski, Lawyer (Nepean)
The panel previously found that Ms. Stanislawski had engaged in conduct unbecoming a licensee. She had engaged, over an extended period of time, in dishonest conduct while in a senior position of trust and responsibility. She had no prior disciplinary history. While she expressed regret, she had not expressed remorse, or accepted responsibility for her actions. The weight of the authorities supported revocation. The panel concluded that revocation was necessary to send the message to the public that conduct unbecoming of this nature and extent would not be tolerated.
Sheila Joy Stanislawski, Lawyer (Nepean)
Ms. Stanislawski brought a motion for disclosure of the Law Society’s PAC memorandum, which was very unlikely to succeed and did not. This was a straightforward situation in which the amount sought was reasonable, inability to pay had not been shown and there was no good reason that the costs of the unsuccessful motion should not be paid.
Licio Edward Cengarle, Lawyer (Etobicoke)
Mr. Cengarle’s long-time assistant, who was entrusted with extensive aspects of his real estate practice, including trust deposits and disbursements, carried out a fraudulent scheme using Mr. Cengarle’s trust account. The panel found that, although Mr. Cengarle was unaware of the scheme, he: signed trust cheques written to third parties without confirming they were for proper disbursements; failed to supervise his assistant; and operated his practice in such a way that he should have known could facilitate dishonesty/fraud. Mr. Cengarle was also found to have allowed his assistant to use his Teranet Passkey, failed to discharge a mortgage despite his personal undertaking and failed to respond promptly and completely to two Law Society investigations. A penalty hearing is to be scheduled.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Following a series of pre-hearing motions heard over three days in which the Law Society was successful in its motion and Mr. Khan unsuccessful in his, the Law Society sought $12,000 in costs based on a bill of $17,185. Mr. Khan sought to avoid costs on the bases that: he was financially impacted by the pandemic; the panel exceeded its jurisdiction, was biased and the hearing was procedurally unfair; Law Society counsel engaged in sharp practice; the amount of costs sought was excessive for salaried counsel; and costs should be deferred to the end of the hearing of the conduct application. The panel rejected Mr. Khan’s arguments, found that the amount sought was reasonable in the circumstances, which included Mr. Khan’s conduct of the matter, and awarded costs of $12,000.
Ian Jerrold Collins, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Collins acknowledged that he had allowed a suspended lawyer to assist him in relation to a judicial review of an arbitration decision. This included allowing the suspended lawyer to do research, clerical work, and drafting and filing court documents. The panel accepted the joint submission of a reprimand based on the parties’ agreement and the Tribunal jurisprudence with respect to similar misconduct.
Martin Christopher Schulz, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Schulz was criminally charged in 2013 and convicted in 2016. He was sentenced to 45 days imprisonment, the minimum sentence at the time for his offence, followed by three years of probation and a ten-year prohibition on the use of internet-connected devises other than for employment or legal purposes. The Law Society sought a determination that revocation was the presumptive penalty for a licensee convicted of possessing child pornography. Mr. Schulz pointed to the Tribunal’s jurisprudence involving conduct unbecoming a licensee, where the Tribunal adopts an individualized approach to the determination of penalty using the Aguirre factors. The panel stated that any expansion of the categories of cases to which presumptive revocation applies ought to be done cautiously. It declined to adopt a presumptive revocation framework and applied the Aguirre factors. Mr. Schulz was suspended for nine months and was prohibited from being alone with persons under the age of 18 in connection with his practice and restricted from practising law in any matter involving intimate images.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Bush did not dispute that he failed to co-operate in an investigation by failing to produce information and documents requested by the Law Society. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission that Mr. Bush, who had no discipline record, be suspended indefinitely pending compliance and for one month thereafter.
Nader Fathi, Paralegal (North York)
Mr. Fathi did not attend or participate in the hearing and was found in his absence to have attempted to induce a witness, using bribery, profanity and threats of physical harm to the witness and his family, to falsify evidence in order to pervert the outcome of a Tribunal proceeding. The panel held that the misconduct impugned the integrity of the profession to such degree that revocation was required, and also that Mr. Fathi has made clear he is not willing to be governed, and so it revoked Mr. Fathi’s licence.
Monika Tomaszewska, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Ms. Tomaszewska took two years to completely answer investigative requests in respect of three investigations and testified that although she did not maintain books and records in the past, she was currently compliant with By-Law 9. She had a number of health issues but did not assert, nor did the medical evidence establish, that they prevented her from being able to fulfil her regulatory obligations. The panel found that taking two years to respond was too long to be considered prompt, even in the circumstances of Ms. Tomaszewska’s health issues, and that her books and records remained non-compliant despite her efforts to comply with By-Law 9. Ms. Tomaszewska was suspended indefinitely pending compliance with the books and records requirements, but the panel declined to order the usual one-month suspension to follow, finding that a reprimand was sufficient given the mitigating circumstances; additional CPD and a requirement to provide quarterly reports for three years showing continued compliance with By-Law 9 were also ordered.
Although Ms. Tomaszewska agreed with the $10,000 in costs sought by the Law Society, the panel held that costs associated with the increased complexity of the hearing resulting from the need to accommodate Ms. Tomaszewska’s disability ought to be borne by the Society and not the respondent; as well, the evidence established financial hardship and the usual cost orders in summary hearings was much less. Therefore, the panel ordered costs of $5,000, with one year to pay.
Jennifer Michele Tremblay-Hall, Lawyer (Sault Ste. Marie)
A random spot audit in 2019 found various regulatory concerns. Ms. Tremblay-Hall admitted she transferred funds from her mixed trust account to her general account on multiple occasions to cover personal and business expenses. The parties agreed that the presumptive penalty for misappropriation is revocation, and so the panel revoked Ms. Tremblay-Hall’s licence.
Cecil Norman, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Mr. Norman had provided some but not all of the information and documents requested by the Law Society investigator, and argued that he had responded promptly and completely in the circumstances which included: difficulty accessing his office due to pandemic health restrictions; not having a trust account and therefore no records related to one; and the fact that an audit had been completed. The panel rejected Mr. Norman’s explanations, finding they were either contrary to the evidence, irrelevant and/or reflected “fundamental and surprising misunderstandings” of a licensee’s obligations to maintain books and records. The panel therefore found professional misconduct. A penalty hearing is to be scheduled.
- 17/12/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
There were no new regulatory notices posted this week.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Claudio Martini & Maria Frances Marusic, Lawyers (Windsor)
A conduct hearing will be held from December 20&21, 2021 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Rishma Visram Gupta, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 20, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Keith Stuart Shaw, Paralegal (Ottawa-Carleton)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on December 20, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Ahmed Kaiser Akbar, Lawyer (Burlington)
Mr. Akbar engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation, failing to maintain books and records, and failing to comply with an undertaking. His licence is suspended until he has demonstrated that his books and records are in compliance, and for two months after that. He is ordered to participate in a spot audit, and pay $6,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Ryan Jesse Manilla, Lawyer (Vaughan)
The panel orders that Mr. Manilla will pay $18,084 in costs to the Law Society.
Robert Kenneth Dunham, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Dunham engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. A reprimand is ordered, along with $7,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Letebrhan Beyene Nugusse, Lawyer (North York)
Mr. Nugusse engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Sheila Joy Stanislawski, Lawyer (Nepean)
Ms. Stanislawski engaged in conduct unbecoming a licensee by tending to bring discredit up on the legal profession and altering invoices to obtain reimbursement from her employer. Her license is revoked, and she is ordered to pay $125,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Martin Tweyman, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Tweyman entered an agreed statement of facts and admitted that he engaged in professional misconduct by having a romantic/sexual relationship with a family law client and also by making sexually suggestive and/or obscene and/or derogatory remarks to another client. The panel found misconduct as alleged and accepted the parties’ joint penalty submission for a two-month suspension.
Elena Levy, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Levy entered an agreed statement of facts and admitted that she engaged in professional misconduct as alleged by, among other things, withdrawing $17,500 from her firm’s mixed trust account without performing legal services and rendering an account. As it found that there were no exceptional circumstances, the panel ordered the presumptive penalty of revocation.
Tracey Marie Resetar, Lawyer (Toronto)
In the context of a reinstatement application, Ms. Resetar sought recusal of the panel on the basis of bias and a reasonable apprehension of bias in that, among other things: the chair had been the subject of other recusal motions and had made findings that other licensees lacked capacity; the chair was conflicted in that she was a part-time member of a tribunal in the Northwest Territories where Ms. Resetar had an outstanding civil claim against the government; and the panel had made rulings unfavourable to Ms. Resetar. The panel held that none of the alleged grounds of bias would cause a reasonable person to believe that the panel would not decide the matter fairly, and so it denied the motion.
Hezekiah Ho-Fai Tai, Paralegal Applicant (Markham)
In Mr. Tai’s initial application, he did not disclose his prior disciplinary history from while he was a police officer. He submitted an amended good character form a month later, saying that he misunderstood the questions. The panel found that Mr. Tai deliberately misrepresented his discipline history in the application, and so dismissed the application for licensing.
Ahmed Kaiser Akbar, Lawyer (Burlington)
Mr. Akbar acknowledged that since July 2018 he has not maintained books and records in accordance with By-Law 9, and failed to co-operate with an investigation by failing to produce them as asked. He argued that he did not breach his undertaking to provide complete books and records by a specified date, in that it was an implied qualification that he was to make reasonable efforts, which he did but required more time. The panel found on the evidence that Mr. Akbar’s undertaking was not qualified and that, in any event, he still had not produced the books and records by the time of the hearing seven months later. Because misconduct was found as alleged, Mr. Akbar was suspended indefinitely pending compliance with By-Law 9 and for two months thereafter, and was required to participate in a spot audit within 24 months of returning to practice.
Ryan Jesse Manilla, Lawyer (Vaughan)
Following Mr. Manilla’s unsuccessful appeal of the three-month suspension ordered by the hearing panel, the Law Society sought $18,084 in costs, which was discounted by 20% from costs actually incurred. Mr. Manilla argued that no costs or minimal costs of $5,000 should be ordered because: (a) an appeal was necessary to correct the hearing panel’s error in finding that presumptive revocation applied in principle; (b) he should have the benefit of the same discount applied to costs orders in other appeals; and (c) he was in financial hardship. The panel rejected Mr. Manilla’s arguments, noting that: the three-month suspension imposed by the hearing panel was upheld; no costs principle would be served and yet complexity would be created by comparing to discounts applied rather than the general range of costs for appeals of comparable length and complexity; and Mr. Manilla did not establish an evidentiary basis on which to reduce costs. The panel ordered costs of $18,084 as requested, noting that this amount was at the lower-middle end of the range, with two years to pay.
- 10/12/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Julie Lynn St. John, Lawyer (Windsor)
A notice of appeal of an administrative order was filed on December 3, 2021.
Kimberly Anne Bates, Paralegal (Ennismore)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on December 2, 2021.
Ruth-Anne Dawn Avruskin, Lawyer (Orangeville)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on December 2, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Claudio Martini & Maria Frances Marusic, Lawyers (Windsor)
A conduct hearing will be held from December 13-17, 2021 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Brooklin)
A motion within an appeal by the licensee will be heard on December 13, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Dan Ronen, Lawyer (Thornhill)
A licensing hearing will be held on December 13, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on December 14, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on December 15-17, 2021 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Rhonda Fleming, Paralegal (Merrickville-Wolford)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 15, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Patrick Leo Wayne Cusack, Lawyer (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on December 17, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Gavin McNeill Grant, Lawyer (Owen Sound)
Mr. Grant engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a licensee by committing sexual acts with an underaged former client, providing alcohol and drugs to her and her underaged friend, impregnating his underaged former client, unwelcome sexual solicitations, sexual assault and unwelcome touching, requests for sexual favours, unwelcome comments, the display of pornography in the law office and at office-related events, involving an employee in his purchase of an illicit drug from a client of the respondent’s law firm, propositioning a potential client in his office, hosting parties at his employer’s law office for minors and providing alcohol and drugs for their consumption and use, and assaulting a domestic partner. His licence is revoked.
Monika Tomaszewska, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Ms. Tomaszewska engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations and failing to maintain books and records. Her licence is suspended until she has brought her books and records into compliance. A reprimand is also ordered, as well as additional Continuing Professional Development hours and the employ of an accountant or bookkeeper for three years. She is also ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Hezekiah Ho-Fai Tai, Paralegal Applicant (Markham)
Mr. Tai is not presently of good character, and so his licensing application is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Benito Bennardo, Paralegal (Toronto)
The hearing panel made a finding of professional misconduct and imposed the agreed to penalty and cost order based on the parties’ joint submission. Mr. Bennardo appealed the penalty disposition, arguing that the hearing panel denied him procedural fairness because of the way it handled the uncontested motion to remove counsel. The appeal panel concluded that there was nothing that amounted to a denial of procedural fairness, and so the appeal was dismissed.
Christopher John Di Giacomo, Lawyer (Niagara Falls)
Mr. Di Giacomo admitted to the allegations of misconduct involving 84 investor clients, 16 separate syndicates and 16 real estate projects. All of the projects had failed and all of the clients lost some or all of their investments. The parties jointly proposed a one-year suspension together with a permanent practice restriction on acting regarding a syndicated mortgage as well as other terms. The parties submitted that the penalty fell within the reasonable range for very incompetent conduct. The panel disagreed.
The panel concluded that there was no factual evidence or admission of “extreme incompetence”, and found that it was not credible that Mr. Di Giacomo was unaware of who his clients were. The panel stated that Mr. Giacomo had totally ignored his obligation to serve the interests of his clients and failed to communicate with his clients, not obtaining their consent to a joint retainer or disclosing conflicts of interest which arose due to the interests of his father; Mr. Giacomo misstated and misrepresented many facts in communications with his clients and other counsel, and failed to disclose many relevant facts.
The panel concluded that although the police decided not to proceed with a criminal case for fraud, the panel had sufficient evidence to infer, on a balance of probabilities, dishonesty and/or wilful or reckless misconduct. The panel was unable to conclude that Mr. Di Giacomo was duped, and found that he acted deliberately or wilfully or recklessly. The panel concluded that the jointly proposed penalty could undermine public confidence in the administration of justice. A schedule was set to receive further submissions on penalty.
Martin Jeffrey Doane, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Doane provided some of the information and documents requested, but his responses were slow and ultimately incomplete. The panel ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance followed by a one-month suspension, considering that Mr. Doane advised that he no longer wished to practise law, and that he had no discipline history. A conditional fine was also imposed.
Jason Michael Ramsay, Paralegal (Toronto)
By the date of the hearing, Mr. Ramsay had not fully complied with the requests for information. Although he had a similar disciplinary finding in 2017, the parties jointly submitted that Mr. Ramsay be indefinitely suspended pending compliance, to be followed by a one-month fixed suspension as opposed to a two-month fixed suspension, reasoning that penalty orders should not be made in a mechanical fashion, though fairness is achieved by treating like cases in like manner. Here Mr. Ramsay’s personal circumstances were such that the Law Society suggested that progressive discipline was not required, and the panel accepted the joint penalty submission.
Alice Marie Palumbo, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Palumbo was given proper notice and did not attend; the hearing proceeded in her absence. The panel found that Ms. Palumbo failed to provide materials and information she told the investigator that she would provide, as well as failing to schedule a continuation of her investigatory interview. Noting that Ms. Palumbo was also administratively suspended, the panel suspended her indefinitely pending compliance, to be followed by a one-month suspension. A conditional fine was also imposed.
Lauren Jane Krahn Gabriel, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Gabriel did not appear at the hearing although properly served with the required material. The panel found that she had failed to co-operate with the Law Society and suspended her indefinitely pending compliance, to be followed by a one-month suspension. A conditional fine was also imposed.
Kenneth Jacob Birchall, Lawyer (London)
Mr. Birchall was properly served with the required material and the hearing proceeded in his absence. The panel found that Mr. Birchall had not made good faith efforts to co-operate with the Law Society, and so he was suspended indefinitely pending compliance, to be followed by a one-month suspension.
Bradley Jason Wallace, Lawyer (St. Thomas)
Mr. Wallace did not appear at the hearing although properly served with the required material. The panel found that he had failed to co-operate with two investigations as alleged, and so he was suspended indefinitely pending compliance, to be followed by a one-month suspension once he had fully co-operated and cured his administrative suspension.
- 03/12/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Mark Wade Smith, Lawyer (Kanata)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 26, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Rishma Visram Gupta, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 7, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Claudio Martini & Maria Frances Marusic, Lawyers (Windsor)
A conduct hearing will be held from December 8-10, 2021 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Keith Stuart Shaw, Paralegal (Ottawa-Carleton)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on December 10, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
John Douglas King, Lawyer (Port Elgin)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 10, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, avocat (Ottawa)
La formation a considéré la motion de Me Wansome de modifier ou annuler l’ordonnance du 6 décembre 2019 de la sanction de première instance dans le dossier du Tribunal numéro 19H-112. La Motion est rejetée.
Benito Bennardo, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Bennardo’s appeal is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Wansome brought an application seeking to vary the terms of a 2019 interlocutory suspension order. The panel found that reimbursement to clients of sums taken did not constitute a sufficient material change to justify the cancellation or modification of the interlocutory order, and further, that there was no evidence of racial discrimination or harassment against Mr. Wansome by the Law Society. Because there was no material change in circumstances that could have led to a different decision, the motion was denied.
Sang-Kyun Suh, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Suh brought a motion to separate the allegations into two separate hearings. The parties agreed that the “interests of justice” test, applied in criminal proceedings, was appropriate. Assessment of credibility would be a key task, and Mr. Suh submitted that cross-pollination of credibility assessments posed a heightened risk for prejudice. The motion panel found that the nature of the Tribunal proceedings substantially ameliorate this risk, as well as noting that there is obvious inherent efficiency in holding one hearing rather than two when considering everything from scheduling the hearing to panel deliberation time. The motion panel was not satisfied that the interests of justice required the allegation to be heard separately, and so the motion was dismissed.
Thelma Pushparanee Williams, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
In 2014, a hearing panel found that Ms. Williams had recklessly, and therefore knowingly, engaged in fraud in one real estate transaction, and failed to be honest and candid with her lender clients in another. The panel also found that she failed to be on guard against being a dupe of unscrupulous clients in four transactions. The panel revoked her licence, and her appeal was dismissed in 2015.
In 2021, Ms. Williams applied to have her licence reinstated. The Law Society submitted that she had not met her burden of proving current good character. The panel found that the most serious misconduct occurred some time ago and did not recur in the next nine years she was practising. In the time since her licence was revoked she had worked hard to understand her mistakes, and the panel accepted that she was deeply ashamed and remorseful. The panel was therefore satisfied that Ms. Williams was rehabilitated, and was presently of good character, and accepted the parties’ joint submission that she should undergo a practice review within six months of commencing practice and an additional 15 hours of CPD over the first three calendar years of active practice.
Joseph Jalal Kanoni, Paralegal (Cambridge)
The parties jointly submitted that there should be a one-month suspension as well as an indefinite suspension pending compliance, but they disagreed as to whether they should be concurrent or not. Mr. Kanoni admitted that he had not maintained books and records as required since opening his paralegal practice in January 2015. The panel found the continuing non-compliance to be flagrant and concluded that he should be suspended indefinitely until he has complied, and for one month after. The panel further ordered that Mr. Kanoni provide monthly reports and documents to the Law Society for one year following the end of his suspensions.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Diamond, in a conduct application, sought the Chair’s recusal, alleging that a reasonable apprehension of bias arose from: (i) his having preconceived views of the business of Mr. Diamond’s law firm, arising from the Chair’s previous policy work, which was said to have been demonstrated in a question the Chair asked counsel in the course of penalty submissions; (ii) the Chair previously having tweeted links to a newspaper article and law firm video which were said to have been derisive of Mr. Diamond’s firm; and (iii) the Chair having sent information about his background and caselaw concerning bias to the parties prior to argument of the recusal motion. The panel held that a reasonable and informed person would not conclude that the Chair would not decide the matter fairly, in that: (i) the question concerned a different topic than that addressed in the Chair’s previous policy work, and properly arose on the evidence before the panel which included Mr. Diamond’s admissions of professional misconduct; (ii) tweets of media stories relating to the policy issue that the Chair was working on would not reasonably be perceived as endorsing negative views concerning Mr. Diamond’s firm; and (iii) providing relevant caselaw so that the parties have a chance to assist the panel in its submissions, and relevant background information given the disclosure obligations when bias is alleged, would not be seen as demonstrating bias. As well, the panel found that Mr. Diamond, in waiting to raise the allegation of bias until after the panel had indicated it had concerns about the parties’ joint penalty submission, did not raise the issue at the earliest practicable opportunity and was deemed therefore to have waived the objection. For these reasons, the motion was dismissed.
Charles Thomas Polanski, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
The hearing panel delivered lengthy and careful reasons. The motion for the appeal panel chair to recuse herself was denied because there was no basis to suggest a reasonable apprehension of bias. Mr. Polanski sought an adjournment first based on alleged inaccuracies in the transcript. The appeal panel found there was no basis for his belief that the transcripts were inaccurate. He then brought a motion to introduce fresh evidence: an interim report from 2018. The report was not admitted as it could have been led at the hearing and it met none of the requirements for admissibility. Mr. Polanski sought an adjournment because the panel denied the fresh evidence motion. This second adjournment request was also denied.
The appeal panel found that the hearing panel did not err when it determined that Mr. Polanski deliberately lied on his licensing application. It concluded that there was ample evidence to support the finding that he was not credible. The appeal panel further found that the hearing panel did not err in its use of the reflections document, contrary to Mr. Polanski’s assertions, and that it had made no error when it denied Mr. Polanski costs and awarded costs to the Law Society. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.
- 26/11/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Michael Anthony McKee, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 25, 2021.
Ian Alexander McLaine, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 23, 2021.
William Joseph Harry Bulmer, Paralegal (London)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 23, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Gavin McNeill Grant, Lawyer (Owen Sound)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 30, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Brooklin)
A conduct hearing will be held on December 1, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Dan Ronen, Lawyer (Thornhill)
A licensing hearing will be held from December 1-3, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Antoine Kheir, Paralegal (North York)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on December 3, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Letebrhan Beyene Nugusse, Lawyer (North York)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on December 3, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Charles Thomas Polanski, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Polanski’s appeal from two Hearing Division orders is dismissed.
Ronald Joseph Loder, Lawyer (Vernon)
Considering Mr. Loder’s appeal, the panel extended the costs deadline.
Jason Michael Ramsay, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Ramsay engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Jennifer Michele Tremblay-Hall, Lawyer (Sault Ste. Marie)
Ms. Tremblay-Hall engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating $73,100 from client trust funds. Her licence his revoked, and she is ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, Lawyer (Ottawa)
The Law Society sought revocation of Mr. Wansome’s licence after he was found to have forged his client’s signature on two affidavits and falsely commissioned them, and also failed to return his client’s file upon request; Mr. Wansome sought a reprimand. The panel applied the decision in Manilla, in which the appeal panel held that the “false documents” categorization was not helpful in that it encompassed a wide range of misconduct, some more blameworthy than others, and that the focus should be on the nature of the misconduct at issue and the circumstances. Here, the panel found there was no intent to mislead the court, which distinguished this case from others where revocation was imposed. Applying the Aguirre penalty principles, the panel determined that a six-month suspension was appropriate.
The Law Society sought $20,000 in costs on a bill of $54,000; Mr. Wansome argued the Law Society spent an excessive amount of time on the file and he was unable to pay. The panel found that Mr. Wansome had not made full disclosure of his assets and liabilities and that the evidence did not establish impecuniosity, although it was accepted that he had been unable to work due to ill health and being suspended. Therefore, the panel ordered costs of $15,000 with four years to pay.
Claude Alain Burdet, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Burdet acknowledged receipt of the notice of application and indicated he would not participate; the hearing proceeded in his absence. Mr. Burdet arranged for clients to apply for and obtain loans from corporations tied to members of his family, without disclosing the fact of the familial relation. He also acted for corporations he had a familial link with against former clients. The panel found that Mr. Burdet acted without integrity and failed to provide competent services to his clients, engaging in a pattern of misconduct involving multiple clients over a period of almost 10 years. The panel found that revocation was the appropriate penalty, and also ordered Mr. Burdet to reimburse a client.
William Joseph Harry Bulmer, Paralegal (London)
The panel found that despite the numerous requests from the Law Society, Mr. Bulmer had not responded or provided the required information and documentation as required. He was reprimanded in January 2021 for failing to co-operate with an investigation, and so the panel suspended him indefinitely, pending compliance, and then for two additional months.
- 19/11/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Nahid Rahimi, Paralegal (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 11, 2021.
Alexandr Korneev, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 11, 2021.
Keith Stuart Shaw, Paralegal (Ottawa-Carleton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 9, 2021.
Jordan Camillo Cristoferi-Paolucci, Lawyer Applicant (Ottawa)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on November 9, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Sheila Joy Stanislawski, Lawyer (Nepean)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 23, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on November 24 & 26, 2021 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Corey Spencer Bennett, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Bennett’s licence is suspended until he has compiled with the September 8, 2021 order.
Martin Jeffrey Doane, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Doane engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that. If he has not co-operated by December 13, 2021 he is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine. He is also ordered to pay $3,200 in costs to the Law Society.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, avocat (Ottawa)
Me Wansome, s’est conduit d’une façon qui constitue un manquement professionnel et est indigne d’un titulaire de permis. Il a été suspendu pour six mois à l’expiration de toutes ses suspensions en cours. Il a été enjoint de verser au Barreau de l’Ontario des dépens montant de 15 000$.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Francois David Lesieur, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel concluded that, so long as Mr. Lesieur complies with his pharmacological and psychotherapeutic treatments, he is no longer incapacitated and may therefore re-enter the practice of law. The parties presented a draft reinstatement order which set out a series of terms and conditions on Mr. Lesieur’s potential re-entry to the practice of law. The panel’s order included terms of ongoing treatment and monitoring, reporting requirements, a staged re-entry to the practice of law and provisions for non-compliance.
Benito Antonio Zappia, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Zappia requested an adjournment arguing that the hearing would prejudice his defence in an upcoming criminal trial. Because the Tribunal hearing focused not on the criminal charges but on his failure to abide by the Rules since the December 2019 interlocutory suspension order, the panel decided to deny the motion to adjourn. Mr. Zappia advised that he would be surrendering his licence and stopped participating in the hearing. The panel stated that licensees cannot be encouraged to resign in order to avoid outstanding investigations, and so the hearing continued.
Despite a trusteeship order, the files and other property of the business were removed from the premises and by the date of the hearing the Law Society still did not know where they were. There had been no attempts by Mr. Zappia to provide outstanding information for over a year. He had continued to operate his business while suspended. The panel found that he had failed to discharge his responsibilities honourably and with integrity. Since Mr. Zappia had prior disciplinary history, and the nature, duration, and repetitive character of his present and past misconduct was sufficiently serious to amount to an unwillingness or inability to be governed, the panel decided to revoke Mr. Zappia’s licence.
Shahen Armen Alexanian, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Alexanian failed to follow the mandatory terms of a Federal Court protocol for raising incompetent counsel allegations, and as a result these allegations were not properly before the court. He took no steps to respond or remedy the error after becoming aware of it, nor did he notify his professional liability insurer that he may have made an error. This was Mr. Alexanian’s first and only immigration file. Although the consequences were significant, the panel found that the misconduct was situational. Because Mr. Alexanian co-operated with the investigation and accepted responsibility, and because this was his first discipline proceeding, the panel accepted the joint submission of a reprimand.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
Mr. Guiste sought leave to retain an expert and late-file an expert report. The panel concluded that in all of the circumstances it would not be fair to allow him to produce his report at this time, more and two-and-a-half years after the delivery of the Law Society’s expert report and almost six months after the Law Society closed its case. Mr. Guiste gave no plausible explanation for his delay, and the panel concluded that the hearing would be significantly delayed if the motion was allowed. Further, the panel was not satisfied that any prejudicial effect from the late evidence could be mitigated or was outweighed by the prejudicial effect of excluding it. It therefore dismissed the motion.
Benjamin Odinaka Chukwu Mbaegbu, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Mbaegbu did not challenge the evidence of the Law Society, which the panel found established professional misconduct as alleged in that he: (i) failed to pay a Tribunal costs order; (ii) failed to remove his office signage and LinkedIn page, contrary to the guidelines for suspended paralegals; (iii) held himself out as entitled to provide legal services while suspended; and (iv) falsely claimed that he had already filed his compliance report and then filed a report falsely stating that he had removed his office signage and internet advertising. A penalty hearing will be scheduled.
Granville Nolley Cadogan, Lawyer (North York)
The Law Society did not produce any documents beyond those they intended to rely upon in the motion. The panel concluded that the Law Society must disclose all potentially relevant, nonprivileged documents it has reviewed and transcripts of interviews it has conducted, and that the Law Society did not discharge its duty of disclosure. To ensure procedural fairness to Mr. Cadogan, the interlocutory motion was delayed until Mr. Cadogan received the disclosure to which he was entitled. There were recent Superior Court of Justice and Ontario Court of Appeal findings that publicly impugned the character and integrity of Mr. Cadogan. The panel concluded that in these circumstances there were reasonable grounds for believing there was a significant risk to the public interest in the administration of justice if the order was not made, and so Mr. Cadogan was suspended on an interim interlocutory basis until the hearing of the interlocutory motion. The Law Society was also ordered to disclose all potentially relevant, non-privileged documents.
- 15/11/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Jonathan Bolton Barnett, Lawyer (Strathroy)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 8, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Vartan Hagop Samuel Manoukian, Paralegal (Scarborough)
A conduct hearing will be held from November 15-17, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gayle Hennick, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on November 18, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jason Michael Ramsay, Paralegal (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on November 19, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Michael William Ostroff, Paralegal (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on November 19, 2021 at 1:30 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Benito Antonio Zappia, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Zappia engaged in professional misconduct by providing legal services while his licence was suspended, failing to comply with a Tribunal order, failing to provide a compliance report, failing to behave honourably and with integrity and failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $6,828 in costs to the Law Society.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Bush engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Mark Anthony Ciarallo, Lawyer (Beaconsfield, Q.C.)
Mr. Ciarallo’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Bradley Jason Wallace, Lawyer (St. Thomas)
Mr. Wallace engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $3,410.50 in costs to the Law Society.
Thomas William Gordon Pratt, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Pratt engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation, failing to maintain books and records, and various trust infractions. He is granted permission to surrender his licence, and ordered to pay $9,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Denise Rejeanne Simpson, Paralegal (Sarnia)
Ms. Simpson had been found to have failed to co-operate with three Law Society investigations. She provided complete responses shortly after the hearing, had a prior finding of failing to co-operate, and was administratively suspended. The panel held that, although these circumstances would normally result in a two-month suspension to begin after the end of Ms. Simpson’s administrative suspension, there were extraordinary mitigating factors here; Ms. Simpson was ill at the relevant time, had lost family due to illness and had lost her home, and her administrative suspension was due to being uninsured which in turn was due to the outstanding discipline proceeding. In these circumstances, the panel reasoned that a one-month suspension was sufficient to achieve penalty objectives. Further, because the reason for the administrative suspension was so tightly interwoven with the reasons for the disciplinary suspension, the panel decided that it was appropriate that the two run concurrently. It therefore ordered a one-month suspension to begin immediately and costs in the amount of $4,485 with one year to pay.
Gavin McNeill Grant, Lawyer (Owen Sound)
Mr. Grant had been properly served and the notice of hearing duly given, so the hearing proceeded in his absence. Although there was evidence to show Mr. Grant used illegal drugs, the panel found that there was no medical evidence to assist in determining whether the drug use rendered him incapable of meeting his professional obligations. The application for a determination of past incapacity was therefore dismissed.
Mr. Grant engaged in sexual acts with and provided alcohol and drugs to underaged people. The panel found this behaviour was discreditable to the profession. Mr. Grant also sexually harassed an employee at his employer’s office as well as at social events, at least one of which was connected with work. Mr. Grant assaulted a third individual as well. The panel found that Mr. Grant had engaged in multiple instances of both professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a licensee and directed that a penalty hearing be scheduled.
Christopher Boyce Sherk, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Sherk entered an agreed statement of facts and acknowledged that he engaged in professional misconduct by being duped by an unscrupulous mortgage broker in various transactions involving three properties, failing to serve his lender clients by failing to disclose material information involving second mortgages, and acting against his former clients without their consent when he conducted enforcement proceedings against them. The parties jointly submitted that Mr. Sherk’s licence be suspended for 75 days; the panel found Mr. Sherk’s conduct to have been egregious, but that his co-operation in the investigation was to his credit, and that he was remorseful, played a limited role in the fraudulent transactions and had no discipline history. It reasoned that the joint submission was not so unhinged from the circumstances of the case that it had to be rejected. The panel therefore ordered a licence suspension of 75 days and an extra 10 hours of CPD in the areas of professionalism and substantive real estate as proposed by the parties.
Mark Anthony Ciarallo, Lawyer (Beaconsfield)
The Law Society sought an order suspending Mr. Ciarallo’s licence on an interlocutory basis pending the investigation and outcome of various complaints in Ontario and Quebec. The panel found that the proven and alleged misconduct in Quebec, coupled with the alleged misconduct in Ontario, established reasonable grounds for believing there existed a significant risk of harm to the public or the public interest in the administration of justice. Mr. Ciarallo had been provisionally struck from the roll in Quebec based on allegations that he routinely obstructed proceedings and had breached undertakings and judicial orders resulting in two contempt of court proceedings; the panel had observed the same obstructive behaviour in the proceedings before it and noted also that Mr. Ciarallo had been removed as counsel by the court in two cases. By virtue of s. 3(4) of By-Law 4, the order preventing Mr. Ciarallo from practising in Quebec also applied in Ontario. The panel ordered his licence suspended on an interlocutory basis, concluding that practice restrictions were insufficient to protect the public.
- 11/11/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Jonathan Bolton Barnett, Lawyer (Strathroy)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 8, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Vartan Hagop Samuel Manoukian, Paralegal (Scarborough)
A conduct hearing will be held from November 15-17, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gayle Hennick, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on November 18, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jason Michael Ramsay, Paralegal (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on November 19, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Michael William Ostroff, Paralegal (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on November 19, 2021 at 1:30 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Benito Antonio Zappia, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Zappia engaged in professional misconduct by providing legal services while his licence was suspended, failing to comply with a Tribunal order, failing to provide a compliance report, failing to behave honourably and with integrity and failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $6,828 in costs to the Law Society.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Bush engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Mark Anthony Ciarallo, Lawyer (Beaconsfield, Q.C.)
Mr. Ciarallo’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Bradley Jason Wallace, Lawyer (St. Thomas)
Mr. Wallace engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $3,410.50 in costs to the Law Society.
Thomas William Gordon Pratt, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Pratt engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation, failing to maintain books and records, and various trust infractions. He is granted permission to surrender his licence, and ordered to pay $9,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Denise Rejeanne Simpson, Paralegal (Sarnia)
Ms. Simpson had been found to have failed to co-operate with three Law Society investigations. She provided complete responses shortly after the hearing, had a prior finding of failing to co-operate, and was administratively suspended. The panel held that, although these circumstances would normally result in a two-month suspension to begin after the end of Ms. Simpson’s administrative suspension, there were extraordinary mitigating factors here; Ms. Simpson was ill at the relevant time, had lost family due to illness and had lost her home, and her administrative suspension was due to being uninsured which in turn was due to the outstanding discipline proceeding. In these circumstances, the panel reasoned that a one-month suspension was sufficient to achieve penalty objectives. Further, because the reason for the administrative suspension was so tightly interwoven with the reasons for the disciplinary suspension, the panel decided that it was appropriate that the two run concurrently. It therefore ordered a one-month suspension to begin immediately and costs in the amount of $4,485 with one year to pay.
Gavin McNeill Grant, Lawyer (Owen Sound)
Mr. Grant had been properly served and the notice of hearing duly given, so the hearing proceeded in his absence. Although there was evidence to show Mr. Grant used illegal drugs, the panel found that there was no medical evidence to assist in determining whether the drug use rendered him incapable of meeting his professional obligations. The application for a determination of past incapacity was therefore dismissed.
Mr. Grant engaged in sexual acts with and provided alcohol and drugs to underaged people. The panel found this behaviour was discreditable to the profession. Mr. Grant also sexually harassed an employee at his employer’s office as well as at social events, at least one of which was connected with work. Mr. Grant assaulted a third individual as well. The panel found that Mr. Grant had engaged in multiple instances of both professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a licensee and directed that a penalty hearing be scheduled.
Christopher Boyce Sherk, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Sherk entered an agreed statement of facts and acknowledged that he engaged in professional misconduct by being duped by an unscrupulous mortgage broker in various transactions involving three properties, failing to serve his lender clients by failing to disclose material information involving second mortgages, and acting against his former clients without their consent when he conducted enforcement proceedings against them. The parties jointly submitted that Mr. Sherk’s licence be suspended for 75 days; the panel found Mr. Sherk’s conduct to have been egregious, but that his co-operation in the investigation was to his credit, and that he was remorseful, played a limited role in the fraudulent transactions and had no discipline history. It reasoned that the joint submission was not so unhinged from the circumstances of the case that it had to be rejected. The panel therefore ordered a licence suspension of 75 days and an extra 10 hours of CPD in the areas of professionalism and substantive real estate as proposed by the parties.
Mark Anthony Ciarallo, Lawyer (Beaconsfield)
The Law Society sought an order suspending Mr. Ciarallo’s licence on an interlocutory basis pending the investigation and outcome of various complaints in Ontario and Quebec. The panel found that the proven and alleged misconduct in Quebec, coupled with the alleged misconduct in Ontario, established reasonable grounds for believing there existed a significant risk of harm to the public or the public interest in the administration of justice. Mr. Ciarallo had been provisionally struck from the roll in Quebec based on allegations that he routinely obstructed proceedings and had breached undertakings and judicial orders resulting in two contempt of court proceedings; the panel had observed the same obstructive behaviour in the proceedings before it and noted also that Mr. Ciarallo had been removed as counsel by the court in two cases. By virtue of s. 3(4) of By-Law 4, the order preventing Mr. Ciarallo from practising in Quebec also applied in Ontario. The panel ordered his licence suspended on an interlocutory basis, concluding that practice restrictions were insufficient to protect the public.
- 05/11/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Peter Vadim Widz, Lawyer (Etobicoke)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 1, 2021.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 29, 2021.
Letebrhan Beyene Nugusse, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 28, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Sang-Kyun Suh, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on November 9, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jennifer Michele Tremblay-Hall, Lawyer (Sault Ste. Marie)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 10, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on November 11, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Corey Spencer Bennett, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a capacity hearing will be held on November 11, 2021 at 10:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Martin Jeffrey Doane, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 12, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ahmed Kaiser Akbar, Lawyer (Burlington)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 12, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
There were no new orders posted this week.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Sarah Zakir, Lawyer (Markham)
Ms. Zakir failed to provide a prompt and complete response to requests for information despite numerous extensions; the entire list was not fully satisfied until just prior to the start of the hearing. The panel ordered a reprimand.
Dorsay Shafie, Paralegal (Toronto)
Ms. Shafie failed to respond promptly and completely to the Law Society’s requests for information and documents, and these requests remained outstanding at the time of the hearing. The panel decided to suspend Ms. Shafie indefinitely until she had responded to the requests, and then for an additional month.
- 29/10/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Brian Curtis Smith, Paralegal (Kitchener)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 28, 2021.
Gary Donald McQuaid, Lawyer (Woodstock)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 25, 2021.
Sandra Zaher, Lawyer Applicant (Windsor)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on October 25, 2021.
Ki Shik Shin, Paralegal (Brantford)
A notice of application regarding non-compliance was filed on October 22, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Jan-Lee McKenzie Hughes, Paralegal (Hagersville)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 3 & 4, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Rhonda Fleming, Paralegal (Merrickville-Wolford)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 3, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Thomas William Gordon Pratt, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 5, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Bradley Jason Wallace, Lawyer (St. Thomas)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on November 5, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Monika Tomaszewska, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on November 5, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
James Jeffrey Bush, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on November 5, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Dorsay Shafie, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Shafie engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated with both investigations and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $6,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Shabnam Akrami, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Ms. Akrami engaged in professional misconduct by failing to conduct herself with honour and integrity, failing to assume complete professional responsibility for her business and engaging in improper advertising. Her licence is suspended for one month, she is ordered to complete three additional hours of continuing professional development, and she is ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Granville Nolley Cadogan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Cadogan’s licence will continue to be suspended on an interim interlocutory basis until the order in the interlocutory suspension motion is issued.
Laurie Austin Dakin, Lawyer (Pembroke)
Mr. Dakin sexually harassed a client. He is granted permission to either surrender his licence by November 30, 2021 or have his licence suspended for one month. He is also ordered to pay $6,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Kenneth Jacob Birchall, Lawyer (London)
Mr. Birchall engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with the Law Society regarding a risk assessment meeting and three investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated with both investigations and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $3,779.50 in costs to the Law Society.
Ian Jerrold Collins, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Collins engaged in professional misconduct by using the legal services of a lawyer whose licence was suspended. A reprimand is ordered.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The parties agreed to adjourn the hearing of the Law Society’s motion for an interlocutory suspension of Ms. Deokaran’s licence, but disagreed on whether an interim order pending the hearing should be made. The allegations involved 14 complaints raising issues of failing to serve clients and making false representations to clients, opposing counsel and the courts. A majority of the panel held that there were reasonable grounds for believing that there was a significant risk of harm to members of the public, or to the public interest in the administration of justice, if a restrictive order was not made, but that the risk could be managed without imposing a full suspension. The panel ordered interim restrictions pending the hearing which included supervision by another licensee.
The dissenting member of the panel would have declined to impose any restrictions on Ms. Deokaran pending the hearing of the motion, arguing that fairness of the process to the licensee is prominent in the determination of whether to impose terms on an adjournment of an interlocutory suspension motion, and that it was not reasonably possible for Ms. Deokaran to have responded to the Law Society’s 2,412-page motion record on less than four weeks’ notice. Furthermore, the dissenting panelist reasoned that the fact that the Law Society had completed its investigation into 12 of the complaints eight months earlier but did not move for interlocutory suspension until two further complaints, substantially the same as the prior 12, were made by members of the judiciary, spoke to the level of urgency and risk of allowing Ms. Deokaran to continue practising pending a brief adjournment, as well as the time fairly required for the licensee to respond. That risk, he argued, where Ms. Deokaran had no court matters pending during the brief period of the adjournment, was insufficient to justify an interim suspension or restriction.
Nnamdi Sunny-Venn Vincent, Lawyer (Toronto)
Certain deficiencies were noted following a spot audit in 2010. In 2011 concerns were noted in a practice management review. Some progress had been made but some records were in arrears and others not consistently kept, prepared in a timely fashion, or maintained in accordance with the by-laws. The panel accepted the joint submission of a reprimand and reporting requirements. Mr. Vincent was also ordered to participate in a spot audit.
Stephen George Reynolds, Lawyer (Ottawa)
The hearing proceeded based on an Agreed Statement of Facts and joint book of documents. It found that the proposed penalty of a 12-months suspension was not contrary to the public interest; Mr. Reynolds had a prior discipline history and the misconduct was serious, involved a number of clients, and occurred over an extended period, however, prior to the first misconduct findings, he had practised for close to 25 years, and the misconduct occurred at a time when he was under extreme financial constraints. Mr. Reynolds admitted the allegations, accepted responsibility and expressed significant remorse, and so the panel suspended his licence for 12 months.
- 22/10/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Nargas Barak, Paralegal (Vaughan)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 21, 2021.
Jenna Leigh Warman, Paralegal Applicant (North York)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on October 20, 2021.
Matthew Adam Beau-Thane Carson, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 20, 2021.
Kirkor Avedis Apel, Lawyer (Markham)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 20, 2021.
Robert Arthur Otto, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 19, 2021.
Glen Edward Matthews, Lawyer (London)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 19, 2021.
Kristina Grace Aureada Valenzuela, Paralegal Applicant (Scarborough)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on October 18, 2021.
Aliamisse Omar Mundulai, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on October 18, 2021.
Antoine Kheir, Paralegal (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 14, 2021.
Stephanie Nadia Colangelo, Paralegal Applicant (Port Colborne)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on October 14, 2021.
Ahmed Kaiser Akbar, Lawyer (Burlington)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 14, 2021.
Michael William Ostroff, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 13, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto) A conduct motion hearing will be held on October 25, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Laurie Austin Dakin, Lawyer (Pembroke)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 25, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Shabnam Akrami, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 27, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Lauren Jane Krahn Gabriel, Lawyer (Toronto) Ms. Gabriel engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. Her licence is suspended until she has fully co-operated, and for one month after that. If she has not co-operated by November 15, 2021, she is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine. She is also ordered to pay $2,418.50 in costs to the Law Society.
William Joseph Harry Bulmer, Paralegal (London)
Mr. Bulmer engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated and for two months after that, and he is ordered to pay $2,829 in costs to the Law Society.
Andrea Mantella, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Mantella engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that. If he has not co-operated by November 15, 2021, he is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine. He is also ordered to pay $2,185.50 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Mr. Kim was given proper notice and the hearing proceeded in his absence. Because he did not provide any answers to the investigative requests, the panel ordered a one-month definite suspension to follow an indefinite suspension pending compliance.
Numerous e-mails and letters were sent to Mr. Mantella, which were not returned as “undeliverable”. Once Mr. Mantella was made aware of the proceeding he responded in an unhelpful manner—he advised that he had not practised since 2018 and had no intention of returning. The panel reasoned that there is a process available to a lawyer who wants to surrender their licence, and that personal renunciation is insufficient. Therefore, Mr. Mantella remained subject to regulation. Because he failed to co-operate with an investigation, the panel ordered an immediate indefinite suspension to be followed by a further one-month suspension pending compliance and the end of any other licence suspensions. He was also fined.
- 15/10/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Jason Michael Ramsay, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 13, 2021.
Claudius Tadeusz Croiset Van Uchelen, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on October 8, 2021.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 7, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on October 18 & 20, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Elnaz Mazinani, Lawyer (North York)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on October 18, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gayle Hennick, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on October 19, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ian Jerrold Collins, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 19, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Behdad Hosseini, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on October 20, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Granville Nolley Cadogan, Lawyer (North York)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on October 20, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kenneth Jacob Birchall, Lawyer (London)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on October 22, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Nnamdi Sunny-Venn Vincent, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Vincent engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain proper books and records. A reprimand is ordered, and Mr. Vincent is required to provide his monthly records to Regulatory Compliance for 12 months. A spot audit is also ordered, as well as $1,800 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Robert Bruce Gordon Stewart, Lawyer (Collingwood)
Mr. Stewart was subject to a 2019 capacity order requiring him to attend for regular drug tests. His physician reported positive tests as well as missed tests. Mr. Stewart was suspended as a result of the 2019 capacity order. The Law Society subsequently received a number of complaints that Mr. Stewart was practising while suspended. There also appeared to be reason to suspect that he sent letters purporting to be from his psychiatrist that were not genuine. Mr. Stewart consented to the order sought. The panel found that the evidence suggested ungovernability and dishonest conduct and so it ordered an interlocutory suspension.
Nader Fathi, Paralegal (Toronto)
After the panel found that he had sexually harassed a paralegal placement student, Mr. Fathi did not attend or otherwise participate in the penalty hearing. Mr. Fathi had a prior disciplinary history, there was no evidence of remorse or acknowledgment of inappropriateness, and, while the misconduct was brief, there were severe aggravating factors, including that Mr. Fathi was the complainant’s principal and abused his position of authority. For these reasons, the panel decided to revoke his licence.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Scarborough)
Mr. David was found to have failed to co-operate in three investigations and failed to comply with a prior suspension order arising from a previous finding of failing to co-operate. The panel ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance, to be followed by a three-month suspension, as well as a conditional fine of $2,000 if Mr. David did not come into compliance within one month. The Law Society sought $10,000 in costs on a bill of costs of $15,000. The panel reasoned that, although costs orders have ranged from $2,000 to $5,000 for simple summary proceedings, those cases did not include costs of the investigation, which should be borne by the licensee and not the professions; also, this was not a simple summary matter as Mr. David alleged abuse of process and raised substantial new issues after the hearing had been concluded. Therefore, the panel ordered costs of $10,000.
Sattar Al-taee, Paralegal (Windsor)
Mr. Al-taee did not participate in the hearing, though properly served, and was found in his absence to have engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond promptly and completely to requests for information in three investigations. Considering that Mr. Al-taee had a previous finding of failing to co-operate, the panel ordered that he be indefinitely suspended pending compliance, to be followed by a two-month suspension, and fined $2,000 with a further $2,000 fine if he did not come into compliance within one month.
Corey Spencer Bennett, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel received an affidavit from a medical doctor who provided his opinion based on a document review. The doctor expressed a reasonable likelihood that Mr. Bennett is living with a chronic psychotic disorder, and noted it was difficult to be more precise without assessing him. The decision to require that a licensee be examined is discretionary; the panel concluded there were reasonable grounds to believe Mr. Bennett is and has been living with a chronic psychotic disorder, and that it would be of significant additional assistance to the hearing panel to have a medical assessment. The panel ordered an assessment under s. 39(1) of the Law Society Act and ordered Mr. Bennett to contact the assessing physician within 30 days to arrange the examination.
Ryan Jesse Manilla, Lawyer (Maple)
Mr. Manilla appealed from the order of the Hearing Division that suspended his licence for three months for forging his client’s name and signed the jurats on five documents, which he then filed on court motions. Mr. Manilla argued that a reprimand should be substituted. The appeal panel agreed with the parties that the hearing panel erred in finding that presumptive revocation applied, but also found that exceptional circumstances warranted a reduction in penalty from loss of licence to a three-month suspension. While there had been a trend in recent Tribunal jurisprudence focusing on the impact of intentionally dishonest conduct on the public’s confidence in the professions, the appeal panel found that the hearing panel overstated that jurisprudence when it held that “the presumption of revocation in cases involving knowing false representation in documents is now firmly anchored in our jurisprudence”. The panel decided that false representation alone, which covers a broad spectrum of misconduct, was insufficient to trigger the presumption of revocation; careful consideration had to be paid to the surrounding circumstances, including whether the contents of the document were known to be false. The panel further reasoned that, while it may be that misconduct other than misappropriation and knowing participation in mortgage fraud should properly attract the presumption of revocation, any expansion should be cautiously undertaken so as not to dilute its effect. In this case, despite the hearing panel’s error, the appeal panel applied the Aguirre principles to determine an appropriate penalty. The three-month suspension was not clearly unfit and was upheld.
- 08/10/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Dunstan Dan Senjule, Lawyer Applicant (Newmarket)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on October 4, 2021.
Martin Jeffrey Doane, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 7, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Benjamin Odinaka Chukwu Mbaegbu, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 12, 2021 at 1:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Granville Nolley Cadogan, Lawyer (North York)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on October 13, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
William Joseph Harry Bulmer, Lawyer (London)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on October 15, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Lauren Jane Krahn Gabriel, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on October 15, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Nader Fathi, Lawyer (Paralegal)
Mr. Fathi engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a licensee by sexually harassing a paralegal placement student. His licence is revoked.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. David engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations and failing to comply with a Tribunal order. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated and complied, and for three months after that. If he has not co-operated and complied by December 3, 2021, he is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine. He is also ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Elena Levy, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Levy engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating and mishandling trust funds, failing to maintain proper books and records and failing to assume complete responsibility of her law practice and failing to supervise her staff. Her licence is revoked, and she is ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Sarah Zakir, Lawyer (Markham)
Ms. Zakir engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. A reprimand is ordered, along with $2,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The hearing of the motion is adjourned to October 18, 2021. Until then, Ms. Deokaran’s licence is restricted on an interim interlocutory basis.
Sattar Al-taee, Paralegal (Windsor)
Mr. Al-taee engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for two months after that. A $2,000 fine is ordered, and if he has not co-operated by November 8, 2021, he is ordered to pay another $2,000 fine. He is also ordered to pay $2,001 in costs to the Law Society.
Thelma Pushparanee Williams, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Ms. Williams is presently of good character.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Victor Wall, Lawyer (Thornhill)
Mr. Wall had no discipline history and had complied with the Law Society’s requests for information prior to the hearing. He admitted the facts and that his failure to fully respond constituted professional misconduct, and so the panel ordered a reprimand.
Tara Florence Lyons, Lawyer (Barrie)
Ms. Lyons did not participate in the hearing and was found in her absence to have engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation and failing to comply with her obligations as a suspended licensee. Reasoning that this was Ms. Lyons’ second finding of failing to respond to communications from the Law Society, the panel ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance, and thereafter for two months, in addition to a $2,000 fine and a further $2,000 fine if she did not respond fully within one month.
William Ndze Fuhgeh, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Fuhgeh was found by the hearing panel to have engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a lawyer. His licence to practise law was revoked. Although the appeal panel found it difficult to conclude that Mr. Fuhgeh had an arguable appeal, it proceeded on the assumption that it was arguable. However, the panel found that although Mr. Fuhgeh would suffer irreparable harm, the quantum of this financial harm was not apparent. The panel found significant potential harm to the public and to the public interest and concluded that the interests of justice did not favour a stay.
The panel was not satisfied that a fair-minded and reasonably informed member of the public could conclude that the proper administration of justice required the removal of the Law Society’s representatives, considering that there was no jurisdiction to require a commercial reporting service to provide free or reduced cost transcripts to a party. The panel was not persuaded that Mr. Fuhgeh met the test for funded transcripts, and so the motion was dismissed.
- 01/10/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
James Jeffrey Bush, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 29, 2021.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Brooklin)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on September 24, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
A conduct hearing will be held from October 4-6, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Elena Levy, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 4, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 5, 6 & 8, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ishwar Roopnarine Dharneshwar Sharma, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 5, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Nnamdi Sunny-Venn Vincent, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on October 7, 2021 at 1:00 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Martin Tweyman, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Tweyman engaged in professional misconduct by engaging in a romantic/sexual relationship with a client, and by sexually harassing a client. His licence is suspended for two months and he is ordered to pay $6,500 in costs to the Law Society.
William Ndze Fuhgeh, Lawyer (Ottawa)
The panel dismissed Mr. Fuhgeh’s motion for a stay, an order disqualifying the Law Society representatives who acted at the hearing from acting at the appeal, and an order regarding the cost of the hearing transcripts.
Shahen Armen Alexanian, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Alexanian engaged in professional misconduct by failing to competently serve an immigration law client in two ways. A reprimand is ordered, along with $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Paula Lyn-Anne Horne Ferguson, Paralegal (Barrie)
Ms. Ferguson did not participate in the hearing although she was properly served; the hearing proceeded in her absence. Ms. Ferguson’s firm did not have a trust account, and funds received from clients were paid into the chequing account. The panel found that Ms. Ferguson had received settlement funds on behalf of her client and did not transfer them to or hold them in trust for the client. She had also been charged with two indictable offences following a car accident, and did not advise the Law Society of the charges for approximately five months. Finding that Ms. Ferguson had acted dishonestly and without integrity, thereby breaching her obligations under the bylaws and acting contrary to her client’s interests, the panel revoked her licence to provide legal services.
- 24/09/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Milica Birkett, Paralegal Applicant (Oshawa)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on September 21, 2021.
Kenneth Jacob Birchall, Lawyer (London)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 20, 2021.
Kara Elane Noakes Hamilton, Lawyer (Victoria B.C.)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 16, 2021.
Bradley Jason Wallace, Lawyer (St. Thomas)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 15, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held from September 27 – October 1, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 28-29, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Martin Tweyman, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 29, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gayle Hennick, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on October 1, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Sarah Zakir, Lawyer (Markham)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on October 1, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Alice Marie Palumbo, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Palumbo engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. Her licence is suspended until she has fully co-operated, and for one month after that. If she has not co-operated by October 17, 2021, she is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine. She is also ordered to pay $3,605 in costs to the Law Society.
Hee Bum Kim, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Kim engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with three Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully co-operated, and for one month after that. If he has not co-operated by October 18, 2021, he is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine. He is also ordered to pay $2,053.50 in costs to the Law Society.
Leon Wickham, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Wickham breached a Tribunal order. He is suspended for two months, and he is ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Denise Rejeanne Simpson, Paralegal (Sarnia)
Ms. Simpson engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with and failing to respond to three Law Society investigations. Her licence is suspended for one month, and she is ordered to pay $4,485 in costs to the Law Society.
Jennifer Mae Dietrich Suzor, Lawyer (Windsor)
Ms. Suzor engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating at least $85,537 in trust funds and misleading her client and the court. She is granted permission to surrender her licence, and she is ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Omar Davendranauth Rambhajan, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Rambhajan experienced a number of traumatic and tragic events. About 30 years ago, he wrote a number of cheques when he knew there was no money to cover them. He was charged, pled guilty and spent three months in custody and two years on probation. In 2005 and 2006 he was issued, and he later renewed, two separate driver’s licences. He was ordered to pay a fine in regards to a charge of obstructing a police officer regarding the two licences. He has been seeing someone for counselling and therapy since June 2018. Mr. Rambhajan acknowledged and took full responsibility for the mistakes he made and engaged in a course of rehabilitative efforts including therapy and volunteer work. The conduct occurred approximately 10 and 30 years ago and his conduct has been exemplary since the events in 2011. The panel found that he was eligible to be granted an L1 licence upon completion of the qualifications and other requirements set out in the Act.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Whitby)
Mr. Rapoport had a prior disciplinary record with a similar pattern of conduct. He expressed no remorse or acceptance of responsibility. The panel found that this was not isolated behaviour, nor was it out of character or unlikely to reoccur. Because his actions harmed his clients, caused lengthy hearings, and resulted in more than 20 adverse findings, the panel decided to revoke Mr. Rapoport’s licence.
Amanda Melissa Ann Broadhurst, Lawyer (Iroquois)
Ms. Broadhurst was properly served, and disclosure had been duly provided, but the hearing proceeding in her absence. Despite numerous requests, by December 2020, Ms. Broadhurst still had not provided the information and documentation requested. The panel ordered an indefinite suspension until she had complied, followed by a further one-month suspension. A conditional fine was also imposed if she failed to respond by November 30, 2021.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society objected (based on litigation privilege) to Mr. Barnwell’s question, which asked, on cross-examination of junior counsel’s affidavit, whether junior counsel had discussed the evidence of the Law Society’s expert with lead counsel. Mr. Barnwell argued that the Law Society had waived privilege by filing the affidavit, and in the alternative, that privilege should be pierced due to the Law Society’s abuse of process, which was the basis of the Mr. Barnwell’s motion to quash the conduct application. The panel rejected both arguments, noting that the affidavit contained no privileged information such that waiver was not implied, and that an allegation of misconduct was insufficient to pierce litigation privilege, the purpose of which was to create a “zone of privacy” in relation to pending or apprehended litigation. The panel therefore sustained the Law Society’s objection.
Ronald James Walker, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Walker failed to co-operate with an investigation since March 2021. The parties’ joint submission on penalty was accepted and Mr. Walker was suspended indefinitely until he complied with the requests for information, followed by a one month suspension. A conditional fine was also imposed. The parties did not agree on costs. The LSO provided Mr. Walker with a bill of costs and then filed an updated, higher bill of costs at the hearing. The panel ordered Mr. Walker to pay the lower amount reflected in the first bill of costs because Mr. Walker believed that was the amount the LSO would be seeking when he agreed to the joint submission on finding and penalty.
Berto Napoleone (Woodbridge), Angelo Consiglio (Woodbridge), Marco Cianfarani (Toronto), Paralegals
The three paralegals, who operated as partners, entered an agreed statement of fact and acknowledged that they engaged in professional misconduct by each failing to remit $2,680.53 in HST collected on fees to the Canada Revenue Agency and failing to maintain books and records, in addition to engaging in conduct unbecoming by each failing to report $20,619.47 in income on personal and/or business income tax returns. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission for a one-month suspension given the lack of discipline history, the Paralegals’ full co-operation and timely remediation of the issues, and the stringent public interest test requiring that joint penalty submissions be accepted unless “the proposed penalty is so ‘unhinged’ from the circumstances of the case that it must be rejected.”
Monica Decock, Paralegal (Toronto)
Ms. Decock admitted that she failed to comply with any of the conditions set out in the December 2018 order. The panel found that she had displayed a repeated pattern of behaviour of disregard to the administration of justice and the duty of care owed to her clients; she held herself out as being able to provide legal services after being order not to do so, failed to co-operate with an investigation and failed to notify the Law Society of changes in her contact information. Ms. Decock was ordered to make payments to her former clients before October 18, 2021 and then surrender her licence. If repayment was not made before this date, her licence would be revoked.
Leon Stanley Wickham, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Wickham was found to have practised as a sole practitioner for eight months in contravention of a Tribunal order requiring that he practise as an associate or employee only. The Law Society sought a six to eight-month suspension, while Mr. Wickham argued that no suspension was required because he had been unable to practise since the merits hearing and thus had been effectively suspended for four months. The panel, noting its finding that only two months of the breach was willful as opposed to Mr. Wickham mistakenly or negligently believing that he was in compliance, held that in the unique circumstances of this case a four-month suspension was appropriate, as was a two-month credit in light of Mr. Wickham’s inability to make suitable arrangements to practise in accordance with his revised licence restrictions. The panel ordered a two-month suspension and costs in the amount of $10,000 with over three years to pay.
Manmohan Singh Hans, Paralegal (Caledon East)
Mr. Hans entered an agreed statement of facts and acknowledged that he engaged in professional misconduct when he accepted retainers from two clients and failed to do the work (while claiming that he had), failed to account for and deposit retainer funds into his trust account, failed to respond to communications from his client, and falsely told the Law Society investigator that he had not been retained by one of the clients. The parties jointly submitted that a two-month suspension was appropriate and, after questions from the panel, added an order for restitution to the clients and a CPD requirement. The panel, while noting the recent trend in Tribunal case law to focus on the inherent gravity of deliberate dishonesty regardless of the context in which it occurs, also acknowledged its limited role when faced with a joint penalty submission. The “very stringent” public interest test requires that a joint submission be accepted unless it is so “unhinged’ from the circumstances of the case that it must be rejected. The panel imposed a two-month suspension, restitution order and requirement for CPD as jointly submitted by the parties.
- 17/09/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
David Stephen Strashin, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 10, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held from September 20 – 23, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Shahen Armen Alexanian, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 20, 2021 at 1:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Martin Christopher Schulz, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 21 & 22, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Neil Lawrence Boyko, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings (20H-048 & 20H-111) will be held from September 22 – 24, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 22 & 24, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 24, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Omar Davendranauth Rambhajan, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Rambhajan is presently of good character, and so is eligible for an L1 licence.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Brooklin)
Mr. Rapoport engaged in professional misconduct by charging excessive and unreasonable fees, failing to serve clients, working on a client’s physical file in a hotel lobby and showing photos from the file to strangers, and communicating in an abusive, offensive, or otherwise unprofessional manner. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $75,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Pamela Jean Milne, Paralegal (Ajax)
Ms. Milne engaged in professional misconduct by misleading various parties about the suspension of her licence, misleading clients, failing to communicate with clients, failing to bill for work completed and account for client funds, ceasing to provide service without reasonable notice, failing to report to the Law Society that she was charged with indictable offenses, and failing to co-operate with Law Society investigations. Her licence is revoked, and she is ordered to pay $2,250 in costs to the Law Society.
Sandra Zaher, Lawyer (Windsor)
Ms. Zaher engaged in professional misconduct by committing three criminal offenses related to a fraudulent refugee application and a claim for refugee status. Her licence is revoked, and she is ordered to pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Francis John Chung, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Chung engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond to and co-operate with four Law Society investigations. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $7,290 in costs to the Law Society.
Dion Radcliffe McClean, Lawyer (Burlington)
Mr. McClean engaged in professional misconduct by failing to act with honour and integrity and by failing to serve clients. His licence is suspended for three months, he is ordered to pay $540 to a client, and he is ordered to pay $8,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Hutton appealed from an order under s. 39 of the Law Society Act requiring that he engage in a medical examination for the purpose of assisting the panel hearing a capacity application. The appeal panel considered whether the hearing panel applied the correct test for making an examination order, as well as other orders made by the hearing panel which may have affected the outcome, and held that: (i) the hearing panel properly applied the Lyon test for whether to make a s. 39 order, and any imperfections in its reference to the test benefitted the appellant; and (ii) the hearing panel did not err in failing to adjourn the motion pending court proceedings or strike the motion for abuse of process, nor did it err in quashing seven summonses issued by Mr. Hutton, and there was no breach of the Charter or the Canadian Bill of Rights as alleged. The appeal panel therefore dismissed the appeal.
Additionally, Mr. Hutton sought to adduce as fresh evidence on appeal affidavits, transcripts, correspondence and other material related to his court proceedings against his former girlfriends and the Attorney General of Canada which allege he has been targeted by the Canadian security apparatus and would, he argued, show he was not delusional and not incapacitated. The appeal panel held that, while some of the proposed evidence was new, it could not reasonably be expected to have affected the hearing panel’s decision to order a medical examination. The appeal panel therefore dismissed the appeal.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
Mr. Culliton admitted he committed professional misconduct by borrowing money from a client. Although he did not comply with a court order, the panel found that his inability to comply in these circumstances meant that this did not constitute a breach of the Rules. Mr. Culliton had a significant discipline history with three prior findings of failing to co-operate with investigations. The panel decided that an in-person hearing was not required because the Law Society was seeking revocation. Because, the panel concluded, the progressive discipline approach did not appear to have had any effect on Mr. Culliton, and because he offered little in the way of mitigating factors, the panel found him to be ungovernable and revoked his licence.
Lisa Elizabeth Simone, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Ms. Simone sought to exclude from her licensing hearing any document, record, statement or information which related to, or was made in preparation for, a proceeding before the College of Dental Hygienists of Ontario (CDHO). Section 36(3) of the Regulated Health Professionals Act (RHPA) bars the use in civil proceedings of any “report, document or thing prepared for or statement given at” a proceeding to which it applies. Following previous Tribunal jurisprudence, the panel held that a licensing application was a “civil proceeding” to which the evidentiary bar applied, thus rendering inadmissible materials prepared for use in the CDHO proceedings, but not materials prepared independently of those proceedings. The panel further held that there was also no bar to adducing evidence which established the information contained in the excluded materials, and so the motion was allowed in part.
- 10/09/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Andrew Robert Kerr, Lawyer (Barrie)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 3, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Vartan Hagop Samuel Manoukian, Paralegal (Scarborough)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 13, 14 & 16, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Pamela Jean Milne, Paralegal (Ajax)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 13, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jennifer Mae Dietrich Suzor, Lawyer (Windsor)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 15 & 16, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
William Ndze Fuhgeh, Lawyer (Ottawa)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on November 15, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 15, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Denise Rejeanne Simpson, Paralegal (Sarnia)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 16, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Alice Marie Palumbo, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on September 17, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Sheema Hosain Ali, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 17, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Hee Bum Kim, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on September 17, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
Nazim Clint Ali, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 17, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Granville Nolley Cadogan, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society will disclose all potentially relevant, non privileged documents. The interlocutory suspension motion is adjourned, and Mr. Cadogan’s license is suspended on an interim interlocutory basis until the resumption of the motion hearing.
Corey Spencer Bennett, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Bennett will participate in an assessment and be examined by a physician.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Hutton’s appeal is dismissed, and he is ordered to participate in a full forensic assessment and be examined by a physician.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
Mr. Culliton engaged in professional misconduct by borrowing $150,000, more or less, from his client and his client’s wife, and by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is revoked, he is ordered to repay the Compensation Fund, as well as pay $16,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Victor Wall, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Wall failed to co-operate with two Law Society investigations. A reprimand has been ordered, along with $1,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Joseph Jalal Kanoni, Paralegal (Cambridge)
Mr. Kanoni engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain proper books and records. His licence is suspended until he has brought his books and records into compliance, and for one month after that. He is also ordered to provide the Regulatory Compliance Department with monthly trust reconciliation reports, as well as pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Claudius Tadeusz Croiset Van Uchelen, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Croiset Van Uchelen requested that the panel reconsider the panel chair’s case conference decision to deny another extension of time to file materials. After failing to meet the first deadline, Mr. Croiset Van Uchelen had requested a case conference and sought an extension. After failing to meet the second deadline, he had requested another case conference seeking another extension, which the panel chair denied. The panel concluded that Mr. Croiset Van Uchelen had attempted to orchestrate delay and that a further extension was not justified; the issue of reasonable apprehension of bias was only raised after Mr. Croiset Van Uchelen was denied the relief requested, and so the motion was dismissed.
Claudius Tadeusz Croiset Van Uchelen, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Despite numerous extensions, Mr. Croiset Van Uchelen failed to provide complete responses, nor did he provide any evidence of any circumstances to explain or excuse the delay and failure to provide complete responses. Reasoning that effective self-regulation requires licensees to be willing and able to be regulated, the panel found Mr. Croiset Van Uchelen to have engaged in professional misconduct for failing to co-operate in 13 separate investigations in three separate conduct applications. Because there was also a pattern of non-compliance and delay within the conduct applications, the panel concluded that there was no reasonable prospect of Mr. Croiset Van Uchelen complying with his regulatory obligations. Mr. Croiset Van Uchelen was found to be ungovernable and his licence was revoked.
Shawn Kelly Campbell, Lawyer (Georgetown)
Mr. Campbell did not attend the hearing though properly served, and the hearing proceeded in his absence based on deemed admissions. The panel found that, at most, Mr. Campbell had properly disbursed less than 25% of the money he received for eight estate clients and three other clients, as well as transferred his clients’ funds without authorization. The panel reasoned that it is fundamentally important that lawyers and paralegals are scrupulous in protecting a client’s trust funds, and so, absent extenuating or mitigating circumstances, the presumptive penalty for misappropriation was ordered and Mr. Campbell’s licence was revoked.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. David did not respond on the issue of costs. The panel found that the decision to bring meritless motions and pursue numerous grounds of appeal lengthened the hearing well beyond what would be expected for an appeal of a summary hearing decision, and that, given the number of motions and the scope of the appeal, the Law Society’s costs were more than reasonable.
- 03/09/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Adam Robin William Graham Tye, Paralegal Applicant (Peterborough)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on August 31, 2021.
Marilou Nejal, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 30, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Maria Frances Marusic & Claudio Martini, Lawyers (Windsor)
Two conduct hearings will be held from September 7-9, 2021 at 9:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Dion Radcliffe McClean, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 7, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ryan Jesse Manilla, Lawyer Applicant (Maple)
An appeal by the licence applicant will be heard on September 9, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Sandra Zaher, Lawyer (Windsor)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 10, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. David will pay $17,978.50 in costs to the Law Society.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Isaac’s appeals are dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Paul Anthony Wilkins, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society sought $30,000 in costs after Mr. Wilkins unsuccessfully appealed the revocation of his licence following a finding of misappropriation. Mr. Wilkins argued that no, or only $5,000 in costs should be ordered given the novelty and importance of the issues raised, and his inability to pay. The panel found that the range of costs for appeals was between $15,000 and $30,000 with the median being $20,000 and that, having regard to the relevant circumstances including the significant costs actually expended, the complexity of the appeal, ability to pay and the reasonable expectation of the parties, an order of $20,000 was appropriate, with two years to pay.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The parties agreed that certain parts of the appeals could proceed without transcripts and Mr. Isaac agreed to abandon those grounds of appeal outside the agreement. The appeal panel found that the hearing panel had made no reversible error in finding that Mr. Isaac was not permitted to practise law or provide legal services of any kind while under suspension, and that no reversible error was made in determining that withdrawing or amending a particular in the notice of application did not require PAC approval. The appeal panel decided that the panel that granted the Law Society’s motion to quash Mr. Isaac’s reinstatement application did not err in deciding as it did. Therefore, the appeals were all dismissed.
Ronauld Gordon Walton, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Walton brought a motion to admit certain evidence that contradicts prior judicial findings. The Law Society brought a motion to quash Mr. Walton’s motion on the basis that the motion sought to relitigate issues that should have been raised at the Court of Appeal, and that his failure to appeal was determinative of the question. The panel determined that the issue was whether Mr. Walton’s failure to appeal to the Court of Appeal was fatal to his ability to challenge the prior judicial decisions. The panel decided that Mr. Walton was asking a proper question that was not in and of itself relitigation, and so his motion could not properly be disposed of by reference only to his failure to appeal. Therefore, the panel dismissed the Law Society’s motion to quash Mr. Walton’s motion.
Sandy Alexander Zaitzeff, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
Mr. Zaitzeff was convicted of serious criminal offences, which he admitted to although he did not advise the Law Society of the charges at the time he was charged. He had no prior disciplinary history. The panel decided that the offending incidents were out of character and largely related to alcohol abuse, which in turn arose from serious personal tragedies. Because he had taken appropriate steps to ameliorate his conditions and continued to receive counselling, Mr. Zaitzeff was granted permission to surrender his licence to practise law within 30 days, failing which it would be revoked.
Elaine Faith Gordon, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Gordon agreed to the finding of professional misconduct. The panel found that the misconduct was not a reflection of Ms. Gordon’s honesty or dedication to her clients but resulted from her legal practice being in organizational crisis. Because the she had taken steps moving forward to ensure appropriate practice management, and because the panel was satisfied that she understood her obligations, Ms. Gordon was suspended for two months and ordered to engage in a mentorship arrangement for two years. She was also ordered to participate in a spot audit within 18 months.
- 27/08/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Lauren Jane Krahn Gabriel, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 26, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Granville Nolley Cadogan, Lawyer (North York)
A motion within an interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on August 30, 2021 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Francis John Chung, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 1, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 1 & 2, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Corey Spencer Bennett, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a capacity hearing will be held on September 1, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Victor Wall, Lawyer (Thornhill)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on September 3, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Joseph Jalal Kanoni, Paralegal (Cambridge)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on September 3, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Paul Anthony Wilkins, Lawyer (Markham)
The panel orders that Mr. Wilkins will pay $20,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Sheila Joy Stanislawski, Lawyer (Nepean)
Ms. Stanislawski was alleged to have knowingly taken improper financial advantage of the labour union of which she was the executive director. During her absence from the office, the CIPP was contacted by a service provider seeking payment of outstanding invoices. She had received money from the CIPP in order to pay the service provider but had not paid the invoices fully. In addition, Ms. Stanislawski knowingly took the equivalent of 26 weeks of salary in respect of annual leave to which she was not entitled. The panel found that diverting monies to Ms. Stanislawski’s own use is a failure of integrity and is dishonest, as is submitting altered documents in support of false claims. The panel did not conclude that failure to provide receipts for expenses amounts to conduct unbecoming. Ms. Stanislawski’s abuse of process motion was dismissed. A penalty hearing will be scheduled.
Benjamin Odinaka Chukwu Mbaegbu, Paralegal (Toronto)
The discipline history showed that Mr. Mbaegbu did not appreciate the limitations on the scope of legal services he could provide, nor did he accept any responsibility for the outcomes of the disciplinary proceedings. Because the public interest required that a clear message be sent, the panel decided to suspend Mr. Mbaegbu for three months, to start after his current suspension ends.
Denise Rejeanne Simpson, Paralegal (Sarnia)
Ms. Simpson acknowledged that she did not respond to the Law Society’s requests for information in relation to three investigations, but testified she had been struggling with a number of personal issues, including health issues. The panel placed little weight on the medical evidence, which consisted of a short note stating a diagnosis only with no foundation or indication of any functional limitations; indeed, Ms. Simpson testified that she had not responded because she had been unsure for a time whether she was going to continue with her practice, and was ultimately able to provide a complete response. Therefore, the panel found professional misconduct as alleged. A penalty hearing is to be scheduled.
Sukanta Saha, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Saha acknowledged committing professional misconduct and apologized. A spot audit occurred in September 2016 and a follow-up in November 2016. Mr. Saha was not maintaining the required books and records, and his books and records were still not in compliance, despite multiple audits, directions, a follow-up and the ongoing investigation. The panel advised that Mr. Saha make this his priority. His licence was suspended on July 9, 2021, to continue indefinitely until he had complied with requests for information, and then for one month.
Muhammad Zia Malik, Lawyer Applicant (Mississauga)
While Mr. Malik’s past misconduct was significant, the panel found that it was short-lived and occurred within a context of extreme financial pressure and stress. The panel noted that Mr. Malik was remorseful, had suffered embarrassment and gone through the long and costly process of the good character hearing. His misconduct was uncharacteristic and did not define him. The panel found that the public confidence in the regulation of lawyers would be enhanced by the imposition of terms and conditions on his licence as set out in the order.
- 20/08/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Robert Bruce Gordon Stewart, Lawyer, (Collingwood)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on August 16, 2021.
Adam Tynne Joseph Castonguay, Lawyer, (Sudbury)
A notice of motion to vary an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on August 16, 2021.
Kumar Sriskanda, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on August 19, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Thelma Pushparanee Williams, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held on August 23 – 25, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Thomas Michael Harris, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 25 and 26, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paulos Luizos, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 26, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Robert Bruce Gordon Stewart, Lawyer (Collingwood)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on August 27, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Ms. Deokaran’s licence is restricted on an interim interlocutory basis. She is restricted from engaging in court or tribunal attendances except to address scheduling issues or when appearing on her own behalf. Ms. Deokaran is restricted from any real estate conveyancing work and from engaging on any matter identified in the current Law Society motion. The hearing is adjourned to September 27 to 29, 2021.
Benjamin Odinaka Chukwu Mbaegbu, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Mbaegbu’s licence is suspended for three months, to start immediately upon the end of all current or already pending suspensions. He has also reimburse the Compensation Fund.
Muhammad Zia Malik, Lawyer Applicant (Mississauga)
The applicant is presently of good character and is eligible to be granted an L1 licence subject to specified terms and conditions.
Adam Tynne Joseph Castonguay, Lawyer (Sudbury)
The June 22, 2021 order restricting Mr. Castonguay’s licence on an interlocutory basis was modified.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
There were no new reasons posted this week.
- 13/08/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
William Joseph Harry Bulmer, Paralegal (London)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 12, 2021.
Aurelio Pascuzzi, Lawyer (Vaughan)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 6, 2021.
Ivan Mauricio Rivera, Paralegal Applicant (Gatineau, Q.C.)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on August 1, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Paula Lyn-Anne Horne Ferguson, Paralegal (Barrie)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 17, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Nader Fathi, Paralegal (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 17, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Hezekiah Ho-Fai Tai, Paralegal Applicant (Markham)
A licensing hearing will be held on August 18, 2021 at 12:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Andrea Mantella, Lawyer (Windsor)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on August 20, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Sattar Al-taee, Lawyer (Windsor)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on August 20, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Bogdan Antoni Kaminski, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Kaminski engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating approximately $670,639.65 from his trust accounts. His licence is revoked, he is ordered to pay $20,000 in costs to the Law Society, and he is ordered to repay the Compensation Fund.
Ronald James Walker, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Walker engaged in professional misconduct by failing to provide a prompt and complete response to the Law Society and by failing to produce information and documents. His licence is suspended until he has fully cooperated, and for one month after that. If he has not complied by September 7, 2021, he is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine. He is also ordered to pay $1,320 in costs to the Law Society.
Amanda Melissa Ann Broadhurst, Paralegal (Iroquois)
Ms. Broadhurst engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with two Law Society investigations. Her licence is suspended until she has fully cooperated, and for one month after that. If she has not complied by November 30, 2021, she is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine. She is also ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Scarborough)
Mr. David, who was alleged to have failed to respond to three investigations and failed to comply with his obligations as a suspended licensee, argued that the investigations were undertaken for an improper purpose, namely in retaliation for him having filed an appeal against a previous finding of misconduct, and amounted to an abuse of process in that the investigative requests placed an excessive burden on him while he was preparing for his appeal. The panel found that the timing of the investigations flowed naturally from the underlying events and did not support an inference of improper purpose, and that there was no evidence that Mr. David had been excessively burdened, which in any case would have been taken into account in assessing whether, in all the circumstances, he had made good faith attempts to respond. Having rejected Mr. David’s claims, the panel found that he engaged in professional misconduct as alleged. A penalty hearing is to be scheduled.
In light of Mr. David’s claim of abuse of process, the panel heard submissions from him first. While the decision was under reserve, the panel realized it did not have a fulsome appreciation of the parties’ positions with respect to the fourth allegation, which was not part of the abuse of process claim. The parties were given the opportunity to provide written submissions with respect to the fourth allegation.
In his written submissions respecting the fourth allegation, Mr. David alleged that both the panel and the Law Society had acted improperly and in a racially discriminatory manner. The panel found that Mr. David did not suffer adverse treatment and, in any event, there was no evidence to establish that his race was a factor. Moreover, it was procedurally unfair and improper to raise such serious allegations without notice or an evidentiary foundation.
Vijai Sookhai, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Sookhai acknowledged that he engaged in professional misconduct by failing to provide requested information and documents. Because he had fully responded by the time of the hearing and had no discipline history, the panel accepted the joint submission for penalty of a reprimand and $2,500 in costs.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Brooklin)
Mr. Rapoport provided legal services to his mother by reviewing relevant documents and signing documents attesting that he had done so. The panel found that Mr. Rapoport failed to act with integrity in attesting to sworn statements which he believed were untrue, as well as failing to serve his client and engaging in conduct unbecoming a licensee in acting in a conflict of interest and allowing his mother to co-sign and post security on a loan taken out in order to repay funds improperly taken from the proceedings of the sale of her home. A penalty hearing is to be scheduled.
Arkadii Barapp, Lawyer (North York)
Mr. Barapp entered an agreed statement of facts and acknowledged that he engaged in professional misconduct by employing a network of multiple websites that: (i) did not include his firm name or the name of any licensee, professional corporation or business name registered with the Law Society, and purported to be unrelated law firms although they all connected to a single phone line that went ultimately to Mr. Barapp; and (ii) contained misleading and improper content such as claims of being “the best,” staged client testimonials by text and video and claims of expertise in areas Mr. Barapp did not practice. Mr. Barapp also acknowledged that he misled another licensee when she questioned him about why her office address was being used for one of his putative law firms. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission for a reprimand given that Mr. Barapp fully co-operated and brought his marketing practices into compliance with the Rules, had no discipline history and, most importantly, the events occurred during the transition period when the interpretation of the marketing rules was unclear.
- 06/08/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Sarah Zakir, Lawyer (Markham)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 4, 2021.
Rabah Yaacoub Moubarak, Lawyer (Vaughan)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 4, 2021.
Paul Brian Fox, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 4, 2021.
Tarnjit Singh Aujla, Lawyer (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 29, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Hezekiah Ho-Fai Tai, Paralegal Applicant (Markham)
A licensing hearing will be held on August 9 & 10, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 10, 2021 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Gavin McNeill Grant, Lawyer (Owen Sound)
A conduct and capacity hearing will be held on August 10, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Mark Anthony Ciarallo, Lawyer (Beaconsfield, Q.C.)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on August 11, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. and on August 12, 2021 at 11:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Dion Radcliffe McClean, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 11 & 12, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on August 13, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Sukanta Saha, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Saha engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain books and records, failing to provide complete responses to Spot Audit requests, and failing to cooperate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has provided a variety of financial records, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Benito Bennardo, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Bennardo’s appeal is dismissed.
Ryan Jesse Manilla, Lawyer (Vaughan)
The panel orders that the suspension order remain stayed until the disposition of the appeal.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Mark Anthony Ciarallo, Lawyer (Beaconsfield, Q.C.)
Mr. Ciarallo twice sought last-minute adjournments of the Law Society’s motion for an interlocutory suspension, unsubstantiated by any medical evidence. Given the urgent nature of interlocutory motions, which are premised on a significant risk of harm to the public and/or public interest in the administration of justice, and the five-week delay that had been caused by Mr. Ciarallo’s conduct (which included a failure to abide by the Tribunal’s rules and procedural directions) the panel decided to suspended Mr. Ciarallo on an interim interlocutory basis until such time that the motion could be heard and determined on its merits. The panel reasoned that, until the motion is decided, the existence of risk to the public must be presumed to be real and, in this case, was supported by the panel’s first-hand experience of Mr. Ciarallo’s conduct. The Law Society sought costs thrown away for the loss of the second hearing date, and so the panel awarded $975.
- 30/07/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Armenak Martin Dumanian, Lawyer Applicant (Oakville)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on July 28, 2021.
Gayle Hennick, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 27, 2021.
Charles Edward John Barrons, Lawyer Applicant (Oakville)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on July 27, 2021.
Nnamdi Sunny-Venn Vincent, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 26, 2021.
Victor Wall, Lawyer (Thornhill)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 23, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Benito Bennardo, Paralegal (Toronto)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on August 3, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Lisa Elizabeth Simone, Paralegal (Toronto)
A motion within a licensing hearing will be heard on August 4, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Leon Stanley Wickham, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A non-compliance hearing will be held on August 4, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 5 & 6, 2021 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Rhonda Fleming, Paralegal (Merrickville-Wolford)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 5 & 6, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Amanda Melissa Ann Broadhurst, Lawyer (Iroquois)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on August 6, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ronald James Walker, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on August 6, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, avocat (Ottawa)
- Wansome doit payer au Barreau 3 300 $ à titre de dépens.
Mark Anthony Ciarallo, Lawyer (Beaconsfield, Q.C.)
The panel orders that Mr. Ciarallo will pay $975 in costs to the Law Society.
Monica Decock, Paralegal (Toronto)
Ms. Decock engaged in professional misconduct by failing to comply with a Tribunal order, representing herself as someone entitled to provide legal services while she was suspended, failing to provide a prompt and complete response to the Law Society and failing to immediately notify the Law Society of changes to her address. She is ordered to make payments to certain former clients by October 18, 2021, after which she will be permitted to surrender her licence, failing which her licence will be revoked. She is also ordered to pay $7,500 in costs to the Law Society and to repay the Compensation Fund.
Stephen George Reynolds, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Reynolds engaged in professional misconduct in nine instances, including failing to comply with court orders, failing to serve clients to the standard of a competent lawyer and acting in a conflict of interest. His licence is suspended for twelve months, and he is ordered to pay $35,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Berina Gacanin, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Despite several extensions of time, Ms. Gacanin did not respond to communications from the Law Society in three investigations. The panel found that she had not acted responsibly and in good faith in responding promptly and completely to inquiries, and so ordered a definite and an indefinite suspension, along with a conditional fine.
William James Wise, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Wise, though properly served, did not participate in the hearing and was found in his absence to have engaged in conduct unbecoming a barrister and solicitor by running a Ponzi scheme in which he defrauded 1,200 victims of approximately $130 million, for which he pleaded guilty to fraud, money laundering and tax evasion in the United States, and was serving a sentence of over 21 years’ imprisonment. Given the “staggering” severity of this conduct, the panel decided that immediate revocation of licence was required to protect the reputation and integrity of the profession.
Michael Stephen Puskas, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Puskas brought an application seeking to vary the terms of a 2020 order which included a requirement that he complete a treatment program by a specified date. The parties submitted an agreed statement of facts establishing that the program had been suspended during the emergency orders of the COVID-19 pandemic thereby rendering the Mr. Puskas’s compliance impossible, and jointly submitted that this was a material change in circumstance warranting a variation of the order. On consent, the order was varied to extend the time by which the program was to be completed.
Benito Bennardo, Paralegal (Toronto)
The panel found the appeal arguable and not frivolous, but challenging; irreparable harm was possible but not certain. The panel reasoned that it was unlikely that Mr. Bennardo would suffer any harm if his suspension continued until the appeal was heard, considering that there was not a significant prospect that Mr. Bennardo would end up suspended for longer than the ultimate penalty order provided.
- 23/07/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Joseph Jalal Kanoni, Paralegal (Cambridge)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 21, 2021.
Saad Gaya, Lawyer Applicant (Oakville)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on July 21, 2021.
Gary Morton Kuchar, Lawyer (Concord)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 20, 2021.
John Baptist Joseph D’Souza, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 20, 2021.
Granville Nolley Cadogan, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on July 16, 2021.
Myles Frederick McLellan, Lawyer Applicant (Sault Ste. Marie)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on July 12, 2021.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on July 9, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Stephen George Reynolds, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Two conduct hearings (19H-131 & 19H-036) will be held on July 27, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
An appeal by the Law Society will be heard on July 28, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Monica Decock, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 28, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Mark Anthony Ciarallo, Lawyer (Beaconsfield, Q.C.)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on July 28 & 29, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, avocat (Ottawa)
Une audience de conduite est prévue pour le 30 juillet 2021 à 9 h 30 par vidéoconférence.
Bogdan Antoni Kaminski, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 30, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Benito Bennardo, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Bennardo’s motion for a stay pending appeal is dismissed.
Shawn Kelly Campbell, Lawyer (Georgetown)
Mr. Campbell engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating and withdrawing $3,376,834.77 from his trust account, failing to notify 13 clients of his suspension, failing to return documents, account for funds, and cooperate with subsequent counsel after the termination of client retainers, and failing to reply promptly and completely to the Law Society. His licence is revoked, he is ordered to pay $16,799.50 in costs to the Law Society, as well as repay the Compensation Fund.
Berto Napoleone, Paralegal (Woodbridge)
Mr. Napoleone engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by failing to act with honour and integrity, failing to report fees to the CRA, and failing to maintain books and records. His licence is suspended for one month, and he is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Angelo Consiglio, Paralegal (Woodbridge)
Mr. Consiglio engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by failing to act with honour and integrity, failing to report fees to the CRA, and failing to maintain books and records. His licence is suspended for one month, and he is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Marco Cianfarani, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Cianfarani engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by failing to act with honour and integrity, failing to report fees to the CRA, and failing to maintain books and records. His licence is suspended for one month, and he is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Vijai Sookhai, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Sookhai engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with a Law Society investigation. A reprimand is ordered, along with $2,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Mark Anthony Ciarallo, Lawyer (Beaconsfield, Q.C.)
Mr. Ciarallo’s licence is suspended on an interim interlocutory basis.
Tara Florence Lyons, Lawyer (Barrie)
Ms. Lyons engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with a Law Society investigation and failing to comply with her obligations as a suspended licensee. Her licence is suspended until she has fully complied, and for two months after that, she is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine, as well as another $2,000 fine if she hasn’t complied by August 9, 2021. She is also ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Gregory Leung Sing Chang, Lawyer (North York)
Mr. Chang did not attend the hearing and was found in his absence to have failed to respond promptly and completely to four investigations. While there was some evidence to suggest that Mr. Chang had been suffering from health issues, the panel found that it was insufficient to establish that he was incapable of fulfilling his professional obligations due to illness/disability, such that a finding of misconduct was warranted. Considering that Mr. Chang had no discipline history, the panel ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance to be followed by a one-month suspension.
Yue Dong, Lawyer (Markham)
Ms. Dong acknowledged that she engaged in professional misconduct by failing to promptly and completely produce documentation and information requested by a Law Society investigator. The parties jointly submitted that an indefinite suspension pending compliance, as well as a reprimand, was an appropriate penalty. The panel reasoned that, although a one-month suspension is the usual order when information remains outstanding at the time of hearing and the licensee has no discipline history, Ms. Dong had satisfied the inquiries as much as possible from outside the country while being unable to return due to the Covid-19 pandemic. In these circumstances, the panel decided, a reprimand was consistent with the public interest test for joint submissions, and so it ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance, as well as a reprimand.
Domenico De Rose, Paralegal (Toronto)
Following Mr. De Rose’s unsuccessful appeal of the hearing panel’s dismissal of his motions to stay the conduct hearing for abuse of process and to convert the proceedings to an invitation to attend, the Law Society sought $20,000 in costs, while Mr. De Rose argued that the Law Society should pay his costs on post-hearing submissions made at the Law Society’s request. Applying well-established costs principles, the panel found that $15,000 was an appropriate costs award in favour of the Law Society. The panel declined to award Mr. De Rose his costs for the post-hearing submissions because, although the Law Society’s submissions were “unmeritorious,” this formed a small part of the appeal and did not fall within the limited circumstances under which costs could be ordered against the Law Society, pursuant to Rule 15.1.
- 16/7/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Hee Bum Kim, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 14, 2021.
Ioannis Vamvakidis, Lawyer (Vaughan)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 13, 2021.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction and a notice of application regarding conduct were filed on July 12, 2021.
Donna Marie Mackay, Paralegal (Peterborough)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 12, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 19 – 21, 2021 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Vijai Sookhai, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on July 19, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Shawn Kelly Campbell, Lawyer (Georgetown)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 20, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Berto Napoleone, Paralegal (Woodbridge)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 20, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Angelo Consiglio, Paralegal (Woodbridge)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 20, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Marco Cianfarani, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 20, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jan-Lee McKenzie Hughes, Paralegal (Hagersville)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 21 & 22, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kenneth Robert Dunham, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Two summary conduct hearings will be held on July 23, 2021, one at 9:30 a.m. and one at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Cecil Norman, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on July 23, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Dominic De Rose, Paralegal (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. De Rose will pay $15,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Gregory Leung Sing Chang, Lawyer (North York)
Mr. Chang engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with four Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully cooperated with the investigations, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Claude Alain Burdet, avocat (Ottawa)
Me Burdet, s’est conduit d’une façon qui constitue des manquements professionnels. Le permis d’exercice du droit de l’intimé a été révoqué immédiatement. Il a été enjoint de verser au Barreau de l’Ontario des dépens d’un montant de 56 980$ immédiatement et de rembourser au client GRP le montant de 8 500$ au plus tard le 7 septembre 2021.
Timm Yi Tian, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Tian engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with two Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully cooperated with both investigations, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $2,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Berina Gacanin, Paralegal (Mississauga)
Ms. Gacanin engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with two Law Society investigations. Her licence is suspended until she has fully cooperated with both investigations, and for one month after that, and she is ordered to pay $4,592.50 in costs to the Law Society.
Yue Dong, Lawyer (Markham)
Ms. Dong engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond to a Law Society investigation. A reprimand is ordered, and Ms. Dong’s licence is suspended until she has fully cooperated with the investigation, and she is ordered to pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Toronto)
The appeal panel dismissed Mr. David’s fresh evidence motion, reasoning that the proposed evidence was not relevant to the issue of Mr. David’s co-operation, and that there was no merit to his accusation of perjury. Additionally, it found that allegations of bias against the hearing panel could not be considered because there was no evidentiary record that supported the allegations. The appeal panel agreed with the articulation of the standard of review set out in De Rose. It found that the Hearing Division made no palpable and overriding errors in its reasons, and so it dismissed the appeal and motion to stay, reasoning that Mr. David did not meet his burden to prove errors of law or fact were made, or his burden to show an abuse of process justifying a stay of proceedings.
Pietro Monticciolo, Paralegal (Caledon)
Mr. Monticciolo admitted that from 2013 to 2017 he marketed an ability to provide legal services on “all criminal matters”, which was untrue and beyond the permissible scope of practice of paralegal licensees. However, the panel found that the Law Society failed to prove that Mr. Monticciolo advised on criminal matters outside the scope of his licence, and so it therefore ordered a reprimand.
- 9/7/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Veronica Joyce McAlea Ceponis, Lawyer (Sarnia)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 5, 2021.
Alice Marie Palumbo, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 2, 2021.
Kishan Jariwala, Lawyer Applicant (Mississauga)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on July 2, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Benjamin Odinaka Chukwu Mbaegbu, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 12, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held from July 12-14, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held from July 13-16, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ronauld Gordon Walton, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 14 & 15, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Elaine Faith Gordon, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Gordon engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain books and records, failing to fulfill an undertaking, failing to promptly respond to communications from counsel opposite, failing to uphold her duty of confidentiality to her clients, and several particulars related to trust funds. Her licence is suspended for two months, and a mentorship agreement and spot-audit are ordered, along with $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Manmohan Singh Hans, Paralegal (Caledon East)
Mr. Hans engaged in professional misconduct by misleading two clients, failing to respond to a client, failing to act honourably and with integrity, failing to deposit retainer funds into his trust account, failing to serve two clients and failing to account to two clients. His licence is suspended for two months, he is ordered to participate in additional continuing professional development, he is ordered to provide restitution to two clients, and he is ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Hutton appealed under the Law Society Act from an assessment order. In an amended notice of appeal, he included four other interlocutory orders made by the hearing panel. The appeal panel decided to grant the Law Society’s motion to quash portions of the appeal, but stated that this does not foreclose Mr. Hutton from arguing on his appeal from the assessment order that the hearing panel erred in its interlocutory orders which impact on the assessment motion and resulting order.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, avocat (Ottawa)
Maître Wansome demande qu’un membre de la formation se récuse en raison du fait qu’il avait représenté une partie adverse à la cliente de Maître Wansome dans un dossier matrimonial. Ce dossier est conclu depuis quelques années. Il lui serait nécessaire d’apporter de la preuve indiquant que la relation entre les avocats en opposition était hors de ce qui est normal ou acceptable. La motion pour la récusation de l’avocat est donc rejetée.
- 2/7/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Laurentiu Ben Eliezer, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 30, 2021.
Pamela Jean Milne, Paralegal (Cambridge)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 29, 2021.
Michael Israel Rappaport, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 28, 2021.
Michael William Ostroff, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 28, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Sukanta Saha, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on July 5, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paulos Luizos, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on July 6, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 6, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Claude Alain Burdet, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 7, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on July 7, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Yue Dong, Lawyer (Markham)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on July 8, 2021 at 8:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Mark Anthony Ciarallo, Lawyer (Beaconsfield)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on July 8, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Timm Yi Tian, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on July 9, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Berina Gacanin, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 9, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Patrick Leo Wayne Cusack, Lawyer (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on July 9, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Tara Florence Lyons, Lawyer (Barrie)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on July 9, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Adam Tynne Joseph Castonguay, Lawyer (Sudbury)
Mr. Castonguay’s licence is restricted on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Francois Lesieur, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Lesieur has been but is not currently incapacitated. His current disciplinary suspension will be lifted, provided he comply with a variety of terms, including a treatment plan.
James Alexander Kay, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Kay engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond to serve his client to the standard of a competent lawyer, withdrawing from the representation of a client without good cause or reasonable notice, mishandling $423.75 in trust funds, and failing to cooperate with a Law Society investigation. He is granted permission to surrender his licence, and ordered to pay $16,725 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Marie Carmen Jocelyne Paquette-Landry, Lawyer (Hawkesbury)
Maître Paquette-Landry admet volontairement la véracité des faits tels qu’énoncés dans l’exposé conjoint des faits. Elle a détourné des fonds détenus dans son compte en fiducie pour ses clients et a utilisé indument des fonds de son compte en fiducie mixte pour ses clients. Proposition conjointe quant à la peine: Des symptômes neurologiques pourraient expliquer son comportement. Les symptômes neurologiques constituent une circonstance exceptionnelle. Elle a la permission de rendre son permis, sans quoi son permis sera révoqué. Elle versera des dépens totalisant 3 000 $.
Omar Hasan Al Zahid, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Al Zahid pleaded and was found guilty of one count of criminal harassment in 2020. He acknowledged that this amounted to conduct unbecoming. The panel accepted that the joint submission on penalty was within the range of penalties that was reasonable in the circumstances, and so Mr. Al Zahid was reprimanded.
Paul Anthony Wilkins, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Wilkins’ licence to practise law was revoked following a finding that he misappropriated a total of $76,742.90 in client trust funds over 19 separate transactions. He appealed, asserting that the hearing panel erred in its consideration of the evidence and law with respect to misappropriation and by failing to consider his status as a Black lawyer on the question of penalty, notwithstanding that he did not raise the issue before the hearing panel. The appeal panel, acknowledging that the Tribunal’s jurisprudence on misappropriation was unclear, conducted a thorough review of the caselaw and analysis of applicable principles to adopt the definition that misappropriation is the knowing unauthorized use of client funds/property where knowledge can be actual knowledge, willful blindness or recklessness. Applying this definition, the hearing panel’s finding that Mr. Wilkins actually knew, or was reckless, in that he was taking trust funds without authorization, amounted to misappropriation, and its conclusion was not undermined by any misapprehension of evidence as asserted by Mr. Wilkins.
As to penalty, the appeal panel considered in detail the jurisprudence addressing racial discrimination as a mitigating factor and concluded that, while the licensee need not establish a “direct causal link” between the disadvantage and misconduct at issue, some connection was required. The appeal panel asserted that hearing panels ought to be alive to issues of systemic/societal disadvantage when they arise in the record before them, however, they are not required to make inquiries to obtain evidence/submissions that the parties have not raised. On the record before it, the appeal panel found that the hearing panel did not err in concluding that the presumptive penalty of revocation was applicable, and so it dismissed the appeal.
- 25/06/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Franklyn Scott Taylor, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 18, 2021.
Claudius Tadeusz Croiset Van Uchelen, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 17, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Stephen George Reynolds, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Two conduct hearings (19H-036 & 19H-131) will be held on June 28, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 28 & 29, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Whitby)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 29, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Berina Gacanin, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 29, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Denise Rejeanne Simpson, Paralegal (Sarnia)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 29, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
James Alexander Kay, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 30, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
James Alexander Kay, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 30, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Manmohan Singh Hans, Paralegal (Caledon East)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 30, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Sheila Joy Stanislawski, Lawyer (Nepean)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 30, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Elaine Faith Gordon, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings (20H-001 & 21H-007) will be held on June 30, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
Dorsay Shafie, Paralegal (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on July 2, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Paul Anthony Wilkins, Lawyer (Markham)
Mr. Wilkins’ appeal is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Ramandeep Singh Gill, Paralegal (Caledon)
Mr. Gill failed to attend a court date, which resulted in his client being convicted of three Highway Traffic Act offences. He also failed to return the disclosure to his client when requested and sent abusive and offensive e-mails. The panel accepted the proposed penalty of a one-month suspension on the basis that the penalty was not truly unreasonable or unconscionable.
Bradley Ian Dinning, Paralegal (Chatham)
Mr. Dinning did not attend the hearing though properly served, and was found in his absence to have failed to respond to six investigations concerning whether he may have mishandled trust funds, failed to maintain books and records, failed to account, failed to file a compliance report within 30 days of a previously ordered suspension, provided and held himself out as being entitled to provide legal services while suspended, and failed to comply with the guidelines for suspended paralegals. He had three findings of misconduct within one year and had made clear in communications with the Tribunal that he was unwilling to be regulated and had abandoned his professional responsibilities. The panel found Mr. Dinning to be ungovernable, and so revoked his licence.
Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. McMackin was found to have engaged in professional misconduct by failing to provide prompt and complete responses to requests for information in relation to two investigations. He had no discipline history and had provided the requested information by the time of the hearing, and so the panel accepted as reasonable the parties’ joint submission for a reprimand.
Sattar Al-taee, Paralegal (Windsor)
Mr. Al-taee did not attend the hearing though properly served, and was found in his absence to have failed to respond to three investigations. He had no discipline record, remained non-compliant and there was no indication that he continued to practise. The usual penalty in these circumstances was an indefinite suspension pending compliance to be followed by a one-month fixed suspension, a fine of $2,000 and a further fine of $2,000 if compliance was not achieved within one month; the panel so ordered.
- 18/06/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Alka Singh, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on June 16, 2021.
Rono Reza Khan, Lawyer Applicant (Mississauga)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on June 16, 2021.
Mark Anthony Ciarallo, Lawyer (Beaconsfield)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on June 10, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on June 21, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Adam Tynne Joseph Castonguay, Lawyer (Sudbury)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction will be heard on June 21 & 22, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Benito Antonio Zappia, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 21, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Nader Fathi, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 22, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Dorsay Shafie, Paralegal (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 23, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 24, 2021 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Mark Anthony Ciarallo, Lawyer (Beaconsfield)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction will be heard on June 24, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Sheila Joy Stanislawski, Lawyer (Nepean)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 24 & 25, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Francois David Lesieur, Lawyer (Toronto)
A capacity hearing will be held on June 24, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
Ersio Amendola, Paralegal (Whitby)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on June 25, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Sukanta Saha, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 25, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Monika Tomaszewska, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 25, 2021 at 1:30.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Timothy Michael Kinnaird, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Kinnaird’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Sattar Al-taee, Paralegal (Windsor)
Mr. Al-taee engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with three Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has cooperated, and for one month following that. He is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine and another $2,000 fine if he hasn’t cooperated by July 12, 2021. He is also ordered to pay $2,347.50 in costs to the Law Society.
Arkadii Barapp, Lawyer (North York)
Mr. Barapp engaged in professional misconduct and/or conduct unbecoming a licensee by marketing his practice in a way that was not consistent with the Rules of Practice and Procedure and by misleading or attempting to mislead another lawyer. A reprimand is ordered, along with $42,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Suzanne Elizabeth Deliscar, Lawyer (Brampton)
Ms. Deliscar acknowledged that she engaged in professional misconduct by failing to provide prompt and complete responses to requests for information in relation to two investigations. She remained non-compliant at the time of hearing. She had no discipline history. The panel found misconduct as alleged and accepted as reasonable the parties’ joint submission for an indefinite suspension pending compliance, to be followed by a one-month suspension.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society’s costs were reserved until the completion of the merits stage of the hearing. The Attorney General of Canada successfully moved to quash the summons served on six government officials. “RS” also successfully moved to quash the summons served on her. The panel found that Mr. Hutton failed to establish that the witnesses could provide relevant or material testimony, and that requiring RS to testify would be an abuse of process and a fishing expedition. In order to reflect the complexity of the motions and their importance to the third parties, the panel awarded the third parties significant costs.
Charles Jason Dudley, Paralegal (Chatham)
Mr. Dudley entered an agreed statement of facts which established that: two client matters were dismissed for delay owing to his error, following which he failed to respond to client requests for an update, account and the file; he had re-allocated $300 in client funds from one matter to another without instruction from the client; and he failed to respond promptly and completely to Law Society requests for information. The panel accepted as reasonable the parties’ joint submission for a one-month suspension, noting that, while the misconduct had significant consequences for the client, Mr. Dudley was remorseful, had fully cooperated, and taken steps to improve his practice management skills.
- 11/06/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Joseph Jalal Kanoni, Paralegal (Cambridge)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 9, 2021.
Azary-Zarik Matanov, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 4, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Christopher John Di Giacomo, Lawyer (Niagara Falls)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 15, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
A conduct hearing will be held from June 15-18, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Vijai Sookhai, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 16, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Timothy Michael Kinnaird, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on June 16, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within an appeal by the Law Society will be heard on June 17, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Benjamin Odinaka Chukwu Mbaegbu, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 17, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Monica Decock, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 18, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel orders that the Law Society’s costs will be decided by the panel hearing the merits of the case. Mr. Hutton will pay $2,000 in costs to the Attorney General of Canada.
William James Wise, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Wise engaged in conduct unbecoming a licensee, having pled guilty of several criminal offences in the United States District Court. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $14,951.26 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Dumitru Muraru, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Muraru initially completed his application by indicating “no” to the question about being found guilty of an offence in the good character section. He later submitted an amendment form changing the answer to yes. He did not correct the response as to whether he had disobeyed any order of any court. In 2011, Mr. Muraru had pled guilty to three criminal offences, and the court ordered a conditional discharge and 24 months probation with conditions. The panel concluded that he had not demonstrated a full appreciation of what gave rise to the original misconduct, and continued to deny responsibility. Because it found that Mr. Muraru did not meet the onus of establishing that he is presently of good character, the panel dismissed the application for licensing.
Ross Morley McLeod, Lawyer (Hamilton)
The parties jointly proposed that Mr. McLeod’s licence be revoked. The panel found the proposed penalty reasonable, and so ordered that Mr. McLeod’s licence be revoked.
Khalid Aziz Sheikh, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Sheikh was served using the contact information provided to the Law Society under the By-Laws. The proceeding continued in his absence. He was granted an extension of time to comply with requests for information and documents but did not provide a complete response. The Law Society had been appointed as a trustee of Mr. Sheikh’s professional business. The panel decided to suspend his licence immediately and continuing indefinitely until a complete response had been provided, and then for two more months.
- 04/06/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Vaibhav Phukela, Paralegal (Oakville)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 31, 2021.Ishwar Roopnarine Dharneshwar Sharma, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 1, 2021.Lorne Howard Albaum, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 3, 2021.Ronald Joseph Loder, Lawyer (Vernon)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on June 3, 2021.UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
William James Wise, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 7, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.Licio Edward Cengarle, Lawyer (Etobioke)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 11, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.Vivek David, Lawyer (Scarborough)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 11, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.Sattar Al-taee, Lawyer (Windsor)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 11, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Dumitru Muraru, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
The panel determined that Mr. Muraru is not presently of good character and the application to be licensed as a paralegal was dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Nader Fathi, Paralegal (North York)
The Law Society sought to suspend the Paralegal’s licence to provide legal services until he fully co-operated in its investigation to determine whether he had obtained his paralegal licence in 2013 under false pretenses by denying in his 2009 application material that he had a criminal record. The panel found that: the evidence of the Law Society, uncovered in 2019, was sufficiently strong and credible to raise concerns about the Paralegal’s integrity and thereby establish reasonable grounds for believing that there exists a significant risk of harm to members of the public or to the public interest in the administration of justice; and that the Paralegal’s refusal to obtain and provide a complete criminal record check through fingerprint submission was preventing the Law Society from determining whether he met the good character requirement of licensing. The Paralegal was suspended until he provided a complete response to the investigator’s requests.
Benito Bennardo, Paralegal (Toronto)
The Paralegal sought to stay a five-month suspension order pending his appeal of findings of professional misconduct that were based on his admissions. The panel found that the appeal, which asserted a denial of procedural fairness, was arguable though not strong, and that the balance of convenience favoured a brief stay. However, the appeal was not ready to be listed as the Paralegal was investigating a potential additional ground of appeal and the panel held that, in all the circumstances including the test for withdrawing admissions of misconduct, the interests of justice did not favour a lengthy stay. The motion was denied.
Francis John Chung, Paralegal (Toronto)
The Paralegal explained that he was unable to communicate with counsel owing to a number of barriers. The request to admit process is an important element of the Tribunal’s procedures, however no previous adjournments or other delays have impaired the process and a hearing date has not yet been set. There is no obvious prejudice created by a modest extension of time to permit the Paralegal to reply to the RTA.
Thomas Michael Harris, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
The Law Society had been served with an expert medical report by the Lawyer respondent in a conduct application and sought an order requiring that the Lawyer disclose: (i) the instructions provided to the expert; (ii) the nature of the opinion sought from the expert and each issue in the proceeding to which the opinion relates; and (iii) a copy of the medical records referred to and relied on by the expert. The panel rejected the Law Society’s position that it had a right to pre-hearing disclosure of the information sought under common law evidentiary principles, and noted that litigation privilege applies to expert reports and related communications subject to requirements under the Rules of Practice and Procedure. Rule 10.6 requires that an expert report be served on the opposing party no later than 60 days before the hearing but does not prescribe what must be included in the report. The panel, having regard to the objectives of promoting fairness and the identification of issues, held that an “expert report” referred to in Rule 10.6 ought to be read as including: the expert’s name, address and qualifications; foundational information (the instructions upon which the expert proceeded and the facts upon which the opinion is based); and the expert’s opinion and reasons for it. The panel held it was unnecessary to disclose each issue in the proceeding to which the opinion relates or the medical records referenced by the expert. The Lawyer was ordered to disclose to the Law Society the instructions provided to the expert and the nature of the opinion sought, failing which the expert opinion may not be relied upon without leave of the hearing panel.
- 28/05/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
There were no new notices posted this week.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Thomas Michael Harris, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
A conduct hearing will be held from May 31 – June 4, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Claudius Tadeusz Croiset Van Uchelen, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 2, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Arkadii Barapp, Lawyer (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 3, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Sandy Alexander Zaitzeff, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
Mr. Zaitzeff engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by communicating in a manner that was offensive or inconsistent with the proper tone of a professional communication, failing to promptly report that he was charged with indictable offences and breaching bail, and being convicted on charges of invitation to sexual touching of a minor, common assault of a minor, common assault (of an adult) and unauthorized possession of a firearm. He is granted permission to surrender his licence, and is ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Benito Bennardo, Paralegal (Toronto)
The panel dismissed Mr. Bennardo’s motion for a stay pending appeal from the finding that he had engaged in professional misconduct. It also extended the interim stay until close of business on May 28, 2021.
Suzanne Elizabeth Deliscar, Lawyer (Brampton)
Ms. Deliscar engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with a Law Society investigator. Her licence is suspended until she has fully cooperated, and for one month after that, and she is ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Stephen Hershel Shub, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
The parties agreed that a conduct application and an application to employ an unauthorized person could proceed together and agreed on the facts and disposition of both. In 2002, Mr. Shub was granted permission to employ “Z”, a former lawyer licensee, and thereafter obtained renewals until 2009 when his inquiry to the Law Society about the new renewal process went unanswered. Mr. Shub continued to employ Z and, in 2017, the Law Society received a complaint about Z’s involvement in a 2015 real estate transaction which resulted in the conduct application and in Mr. Shub’s acknowledging that he engaged in professional misconduct by failing to supervise non-lawyer staff. The panel accepted as reasonable the parties’ joint submission for a reprimand, given that Mr. Shub had cooperated fully and implemented extensive changes in his firm to address the Law Society’s concerns. In the second application, Mr. Shub sought approval to employ Z, who in 1994 had been granted permission to surrender his licence. The panel held that, given the generally positive history of Z’s employment and under the ”careful parameters” and close supervision required by the proposed plan of supervision (which was developed in conjunction with the Law Society) the public and the reputation of the profession would not be put at risk by allowing Mr. Shub to employ him. The application was therefore granted.
Sheila Joy Stanislawski, Lawyer (Nepean)
Ms. Stanislowski, a respondent in a conduct application, brought a motion seeking disclosure of the Law Society’s memorandum to the Proceedings Authorization Committee (PAC) and related correspondence in support of her motion for a stay of the application based on an alleged abuse of process. The panel held that Ms. Stanislawski’s assertion that no reasonable decision-maker could have authorized the conduct application against her did not amount to the “particularized and tenable evidence of improper conduct by the Law Society” required for disclosure of PAC memoranda to licensees. The panel therefore dismissed the motion.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Hamilton)
The Law Society sought $20,000 for its costs in responding to Mr. Regan’s appeal of a hearing panel’s finding that he failed to cooperate; Mr. Regan proposed that only a nominal amount be paid. The panel, noting that Mr. Regan’s appeal was “ill-founded” and included several unwarranted steps including an unsuccessful motion to adduce fresh evidence, found no reason to depart from the principle that the professions should not bear the costs of prosecuting licensee misconduct. It reasoned that the amount sought was already significantly discounted from the Law Society’s bill of costs (by 50%) was reasonable, and Mr. Regan’s claim of inability to pay was unsupported by any evidence. The panel therefore ordered costs of $20,000 to be paid within one year from the dismissal of the appeal.
Shayle Frederick Rothman, Lawyer (Vaughan)
The Law Society brought a conduct proceeding against Mr. Rothman, challenging his firm’s name and its marketing and advertising. The hearing panel found the Law Society had established only one relatively minor sub-allegation and converted the proceeding to an invitation to attend and awarded costs against the Law Society. The Society appealed. While the appeal panel found that the hearing panel had misstated the applicable principles and had misplaced words in the Rule, it also found that the intervention of the appeal panel was not justified, reasoning that the conclusions reached by the hearing panel would have been reached had the correct legal principles and words been used. It therefore dismissed the appeal.
- 21/05/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Timothy Michael Kinnaird, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on May 19, 2021.
Vijai Sookhai, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 17, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 25, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paulos Luizos, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 25, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Thomas Michael Harris, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on May 25, 2021 at 2:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Sandy Alexander Zaitzeff, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 26, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Suzanne Elizabeth Deliscar, Lawyer (Brampton)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 26, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Timothy Michael Kinnaird, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be held on May 26, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gregory Leung Sing Chang, Lawyer (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 27, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 27, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. and a motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be held on May 28, 2021 at 10:00 a.m., both by videoconference.
Berina Gacanin, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 28, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Denise Rejeanne Simpson, Paralegal (Sarnia)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 28, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Shayle Frederick Rothman, Lawyer (Vaughan)
The Law Society’s appeal is dismissed.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Hamilton)
The panel orders that Mr. Regan will pay $20,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Shiva Zareian Jahromi, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
The panel orders that Ms. Jahromi will pay $6,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Janet Allison King, Lawyer (Port Elgin)
Ms. King engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with a Law Society investigation. A reprimand is ordered, along with $2,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Dan Ronen, Lawyer (Thornhill)
The Law Society sought to hold in abeyance the hearing of a relicensing application it had referred for a good character hearing until it completed two ongoing investigations. The investigations, which sought to determine whether Mr. Ronen played a role in a fraudulent banking transaction and engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, had been ongoing for one year and six months, respectively. The panel, noting the Law Society had no evidence that either investigation had uncovered or would uncover any evidence relevant to Mr. Ronen’s character, and provided no timeframe for when it might complete its investigations, held that Mr. Ronen ought not be required to wait indefinitely to have his application heard. The panel ordered that the scheduling of the hearing be deferred for three months.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
In 2019, the Hearing Division ordered that Mr. Isaac be required to seek leave should he wish to file any motion or application with the Hearing Division in the future. The panel found that the claims in this motion were without merit, and did not give Mr. Isaac leave to file his proposed motion.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
The panel applied the legal test for the admissibility of expert evidence set out in White Burgess. It found that the evidence was relevant and necessary, and that there was no applicable exclusionary rule. Given the witness’s extensive trial experience, his teaching and mentoring work, and his active participation in the CBA and OBC on criminal law issues, the panel was satisfied that he was qualified as an expert on the standard of a criminal defence lawyer acting at trial.
Elnaz Mazinani, Lawyer (North York)
The parties agreed a suspension was warranted but disagreed as to its length. The panel reviewed the factors in Aguirre and decided that a six-month penalty was appropriate, having weighed the aggravating factors and the mitigating circumstances, and in light of the submitted case law. The panel concluded that the continuing legal education would be rehabilitative insofar as it addresses the case management and competence issues. The panel also concluded that the costs requested by the Law Society were reasonable given the length and complexity of the proceeding.
- 14/05/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Tara Florence Lyons, Lawyer (Barrie)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 13, 2021.
Greg Ling Yu Wu, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 10, 2021.
Shabnam Akrami, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 7, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings (LCN66/16 & 17H-065) will be held from May 17-21, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 18 & 19, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Three appeals by the licensee (18A-007, 19A-003 &20A-009) will be heard on May 20 & 21, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The panel orders that Mr. Isaac will pay $2,756.25 in costs to the Law Society.
Ross Morley McLeod, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. McLeod engaged in professional misconduct in a number of mortgage-related instances. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $76,950 in costs to the Law Society.
Monica Decock, Paralegal (Toronto)
The electronic hearing is adjourned due to the respondent’s technical difficulties.
Omar Hasan Al Zahid, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Al Zahid engaged in conduct unbecoming by committing a criminal offence and violating the Residential Tenancies Act. A reprimand is ordered, as well as a suspension if Mr. Zahid does not comply with the treatment requirements. He is also ordered to pay $9,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. McMackin engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with and fully respond to to two Law Society investigations. A reprimand is ordered, along with $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Ronald Joseph Loder, Lawyer (Vernon)
Mr. Loder entered an agreed statement of facts and acknowledged that he engaged in professional misconduct by: initiating the wrong proceeding and being unaware of the requirements for an annulment; delaying paying off a mortgage following the sale of property and failing to provide the file documents to the client; requesting that two clients withdraw their complaints to the Law Society in exchange for him completing the work; using a trust account for personal purposes; overdrawing client trust ledgers; depositing trust funds into his general account; and failing to reconcile his trust account. As to penalty, the Law Society sought a 12-month suspension while Mr. Loder, submitting that his Indigenous background was an extenuating circumstance, submitted that a three-month suspension was appropriate. The panel found that in the absence of evidence drawing a connection between Mr. Loder’s background and the established misconduct, there was no basis to consider his background as a factor on penalty. Because Mr. Loder had a discipline history of similar misconduct, showed a “profound lack of insight” into his obligations as a lawyer, and because the integrity issues were aggravating, the panel decided to impose a 12 month suspension.
Julian J Hutchinson, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Hutchinson entered an agreed statement of facts and acknowledged that they established professional misconduct in that he: over a period of two-and-a-half years received/disbursed $76,000 in trust funds in error, misapplied $324,000 in trust funds by overdrawing 115 client ledger accounts and failed to reconcile his trust account; and failed to fulfill three undertakings in two separate real estate transactions and failed to respond to lawyer licensees in both files. The panel found professional misconduct as alleged. On penalty, the parties jointly submitted that Mr. Hutchinson be suspended for three months and upon return to practice be required to provide monthly trust reconciliations and supporting documents for one year, and be subject to a spot audit within two years. The panel considered that, while the duration of the misconduct was lengthy and could have resulted in financial losses to his clients, it did not stem from dishonesty and there were extenuating circumstances including family and medical-psychological issues at the time the misconduct took place which were being treated and managed. Because Mr. Hutchinson co-operated fully, had since corrected the trust shortages and implemented systems to prevent a reoccurrence, and because the requirements for financial reporting and a spot audit would protect the public, the panel concluded that the proposed penalty, while at the low end of the range, was not unreasonable or unconscionable. It therefore suspended Mr. Hutchinson for three months with conditions upon his return to practice.
Hammed Hassan-Olajokun, Paralegal (Ottawa)
Although the parties had worked on an agreed statement of facts and he had been properly served and had received notice, Mr. Hassan-Olajokun unexpectedly did not attend the hearing. He had been randomly selected for an audit in February 2019, and while initially responsive, eventually he stopped responding. The panel decided to suspend Mr. Hassan-Olajokun indefinitely, until he responded to the requests for information and scheduled a date for a practice audit, and then for one additional month.
- 07/05/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Andrea Mantella, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 6, 2021.
Ronald James Walker, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 5, 2021.
Corey Spencer Bennett, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding capacity was filed on May 4, 2021.
Cecil Norman, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 3, 2021.
Adam Tynne Joseph Catonguay, Lawyer (Sudbury)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on May 3, 2021.
Golsa Ghamari, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on April 30, 2021.
Benito Bennardo, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on April 29, 2021.
Ritchie James Linton, Lawyer (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 29, 2021.
Caitlin Eloise Gossage, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct and a notice of application regarding capacity were filed on April 29, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Sheila Joy Stanislawski, Lawyer (Nepean)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 10, 2021 at 2:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Omar Davendranauth Rambhajan, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held on May 11 & 12, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Suzanne Elizabeth Deliscar, Lawyer (Brampton)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 13, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Dorsay Shafie, Paralegal (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 13, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Benito Bennardo, Paralegal (Toronto)
A motion within an appeal by the licensee will be heard on May 14, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Janet Allison King, Lawyer (Port Elgin)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 14, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Yue Dong, Lawyer (Markham)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 14, 2021 at 2:00 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Benito Bennardo, Paralegal (Toronto)
The April 20, 2021 order is stayed on an interim basis until the motion is heard.
Mark Aaron Phillips, Lawyer (Toronto)
From January 2018 to December 2020, Mr. Phillips was incapacitated. He may return to practice, subject to employment restrictions, provided he follows a treatment plan.
Ronald Joseph Loder, Lawyer (Vernon)
Mr. Loder engaged in professional misconduct by failing to serve two clients to the standard of a competent lawyer, failing to conduct himself with integrity, failing to deposit a retainer into his trust account, improperly using his trust account, failing to maintain proper books and records, and mishandling $2,518.38 of client funds. His licence is suspended for 12 months, and he is ordered to pay $12,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Ersio Amendola, Paralegal (Whitby)
Mr. Amendola, who had been licensed in 2009, appealed a 2020 decision finding that his licensing application contained a deliberate falsehood and therefore revoking his licence. On appeal, Mr. Amendola sought to argue that the hearing panel erred in finding that he deliberately lied in his licensing application, and in failing to consider his present good character. The panel dismissed the motion for a stay pending appeal, finding there was no serious issue to be tried, no irreparable harm, and the balance of convenience did not favour a stay. Mr. Amendola’s motion to have the Law Society pay for transcripts and his motion to admit fresh evidence were also dismissed; the panel held that lack of financial means is not an extraordinary circumstance justifying an order that the Law Society pay for transcripts, and the proposed fresh evidence was not admissible, as it was available before the hearing and would not have affected the outcome.
Robert Joseph Splinter, Lawyer (Frontenac County)
Mr. Splinter entered an agreed statement of facts and acknowledged that, in committing the criminal offences of possessing and accessing child pornography, he engaged in conduct unbecoming a licensee. In considering the parties’ joint submission for a 26-month suspension with practice restrictions and ongoing treatment requirements after his return to practice, the panel considered that Mr. Splinter: demonstrated insight into the effect of his misconduct on others; was a good candidate for rehabilitation given his efforts in counselling and treatment with a psychologist; was reported by his psychologist to be at low risk for re-offending; was remorseful and fully cooperative with the criminal and disciplinary proceedings; and would be supported in his re-integration into practice by the conditions proposed by the parties, including for continued treatment and reporting. The panel concluded that an effective four-year suspension (taking into account his undertaking upon arrest on the criminal charges to cease practising) was consistent with the jurisprudence, reflected the gravity of the misconduct and was not outside a reasonable range in the circumstances, and so it imposed 26 months of suspension, followed by practice restrictions and two years of ongoing treatment/reporting requirements.
Leon Stanley Wickham, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
The Law Society alleged that Mr. Wickham, who was subject to a 2008 order requiring, among other things, that he practise as an associate or employee only, breached that order by practising as a sole practitioner. The parties differed on whether the association in which Mr. Wickham had been practising had been terminated by the other lawyer. The panel found that, despite there remaining some connection, the reality was that the other lawyer was no longer providing the structure that the condition was clearly meant to address, and therefore that Mr. Wickham was in breach of the order for a period of eight months. A penalty hearing will be scheduled.
Mr. Wickham applied to revoke the 2008 order, arguing that the conditions were no longer necessary, including the requirement for supervision, and that he repay the Compensation Fund, which he had agreed in 2008 to do in recognition that it was his failure to reconcile his accounts that created the problem. The panel rejected the Law Society’s position that the supervision plan imposed in 2008 was still required but found that, given Mr. Wickham’s continuing practice management issues, he should still be required to practice in association or as an employee only. The panel varied the 2008 order accordingly and removed the requirement to pay the Compensation Fund, accepting that Mr. Wickham did not have the financial means, and should not suffer further stigma from the order, given that it did not arise from any finding of dishonesty or untrustworthiness, but rather poor practice management.
Joseph Stéphane Langlois, Lawyer (Rockland)
Mr. Langlois’s counsel advised that Mr. Langlois would not be participating the hearing. Mr. Langlois was properly served with a request to admit (RTA) and was deemed to have admitted the truth of the facts and the authenticity of the documents contained in the RTA, including that he had created a kiting scheme between his firm’s mixed trust accounts and his professional corporation’s account, misappropriated more than $3 million from the two mixed trust accounts, and taken more compensation from an estate than what he was entitled to take as an estate trustee. Therefore, the panel revoked Mr. Langlois’s licence and ordered him to make full restitution to the Law Society Compensation Fund.
William Ndze Fuhgeh, Lawyer (Ottawa)
The panel had earlier found either professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming on all but two particulars. The findings were related to issues of Mr. Fuhgeh’s integrity and honesty, as well as competency and appropriate conduct. The panel reasoned that there is no principled reason to treat financial dishonesty differently than dishonesty in “false documents”, though the presumption of revocation does not apply to every misleading or dishonest act or statement, and so determining the appropriate penalty remains a contextual, fact-specific exercise. In this case, the panel determined that the misconduct was serious and impacted others, and Mr. Fuhgeh had not established exceptional mitigating circumstances to rebut the presumption of revocation, and so revoked his licence.
Scott Andrew McEachern, Paralegal (Oshawa)
Mr. McEachern failed to attend the hearing. The evidence established that material remained on Mr. McEachern’s Facebook page more than a year after he was ordered to remove it, and that he continues to broadcast offensive materials and disparage Law Society staff, complainants, and witnesses. Additionally, Mr. McEachern’s response to the serious complaints made to the Law Society was to deliberately take steps to be administratively suspended in order to remove himself from accountability. The panel found that there was a pattern of ongoing serious misconduct, and that Mr. McEachern showed no inclination to follow the rules, act with integrity, or respect the professional regulatory process. Because further misconduct was highly likely and he had shown himself to be ungovernable, the panel decided to revoke Mr. McEachern’s licence.
Tuleep Viresh Fernando, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Fernando threatened to file Law Society complaints against other licensees in an attempt to gain benefits for his client. Mr. Fernando had also made numerous ill-considered and uninformed criticisms of the competence, conduct, and advice of others, repeatedly communicated in an unprofessional manner, and made numerous discriminatory remarks on the grounds of race and gender. The panel found it impossible to characterize his conduct as reasonable or in food faith. While concluding that the joint submission on penalty was on the low end, the panel concluded that it was not unreasonable or unconscionable, and so suspended Mr. Fernando for two-and-a-half months and ordered him to complete four hours of CPD relating to equality, diversity and inclusion.
Stuart Cameron Murray, Lawyer (Kitchener)
The Law Society received a complaint from Mr. Murray’s former law clerk, and eventually from 73 other complainants, regarding funds paid into Mr. Murray’s trust account that were not disbursed from trust in accordance with clients’ instructions. The total claims made to the Compensation Fund amounted to almost $1.5 million. The panel decided to revoke Mr. Murray’s licence.
Issam Azzouggagh, Paralegal (Marmora)
Mr. Azzouggagh had been properly served and the hearing proceeded in his absence. Although he had asked for an extension of time to provide a response to the Law Society’s request for information, he never provided a response, nor was any communication received after March 13, 2020. Mr. Azzouggagh had indicated that he had no desire to provide legal services. The panel suspended his licence indefinitely, and then for one month following the end of any suspensions, and ordered a conditional fine of $2,000
- 30/04/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
John Calvin Edwin Barry, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 28, 2021.
Thelma Pushparanee Williams, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on April 28, 2021.
Amanda Melissa Ann Broadhurst, Lawyer (Iroquois)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 27, 2021.
Kenneth Robert Dunham, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 26, 2021.
Sattar Al-taee, Paralegal (Windsor)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 23, 2021.
Courtney Akinwale Kazembe, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 23, 2021.
Jitendra Kumar Sood, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 23, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Two conduct hearings (LNC66-16 & 17H-065) will be held on May 3 & 4, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Francis John Chung, Paralegal (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be heart on May 4, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Monica Decock, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 5, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ross Morley McLeod, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 7, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
William Ndze Fuhgeh, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Fuhgeh engaged in professional misconduct by knowingly attempting to deceive the Federal Court, making ill-considered or uninformed criticism about other lawyers, failing to provide legal services to the standard of a competent lawyer, acting in a conflict of interest, and behaving dishonourably and engaging in conduct unbecoming a lawyer. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $100,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Timothy Shawn Blodgett, Paralegal (Belleville)
Mr. Blodgett’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Leon Wickham, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
The panel varied the readmission order of January 15, 2008.
Khalid Aziz Sheikh, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Sheikh engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with and fully respond to a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has cooperated and responded, and for two months following that. He is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine and another $2,000 fine if he hasn’t cooperated and responded by June 24, 2021. He is also ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Benito Bennardo, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Bennardo engaged in professional misconduct by failing to provide legal services honourably and with integrity, failing to serve two clients, failing to prevent the unauthorized provision of legal services, failing to discharge his obligation to provide legal services honourably and with integrity, failing to communicate with a client prior to his guilty plea, failing to deposit a client’s retainer into trust and failing to account to that client, failing to cooperate with two Law Society investigations, and failing to communicate the results of a guilty plea to his client. His licence is suspended for five months, he is ordered to pay $500 to the Compensation Fund, and he is ordered to $12,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Ben Timothy Peterson, Paralegal (Terra Cotta)
Mr. Peterson did not participate in the hearing, though properly served, and the panel found in his absence that he had failed to cooperate with eight Law Society investigations into serious allegations, including that he may have mishandled/misappropriated funds and failed to serve. The panel would have considered a lengthier suspension than the one month sought by the Law Society, given the egregiousness of Mr. Peterson’s complete unresponsiveness despite substantial efforts to communicate with him over a period of 17 months, as well as the fact that the investigations related to serious matters going to the heart of a licensee’s relationship to clients, the courts and the public’s perception of the professions’ ability to self-regulate. The panel ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance, to be followed by a one-month suspension, a $2,000 fine and a further conditional $2,000 fine in the event that compliance was not achieved within one month.
Benjamin Odinaka Chukwu Mbaegbu, Paralegal (Toronto)
The panel found that Mr. Mbaegbu had accepted a retainer to defend an action in the Superior Court of Justice, and unsuccessfully justified this by saying that the client did not object to being represented by a paralegal. Additionally, Mr. Mbaegbu provided legal services for two clients while suspended, and wasn’t candid with the LRB when he advised a vice chair that he was administratively suspended, rather than disciplinarily suspended. A hearing as to penalty will be scheduled.
Rupinder Garcha, Lawyer (Oakville)
The panel found that Ms. Garcha disclosed information regarding eviction proceedings to her husband, and thus acted in a conflict of interest by preferring her husband’s interests to those of her client, in addition to failing to serve several clients in mortgage and transfer transactions, holding herself out as entitled to practise law when she was administratively suspended, failing to comply with the mandatory guidelines while suspended and failing to respond to communications from her clients. The panel accepted the joint submission as reasonable in the circumstances and suspended her for four months.
- 23/04/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Timm Yi Tian, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 21, 2021.
Timothy Shawn Blodgett, Paralegal (Belleville)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on April 16, 2021.
Azmat Raj Kumar Ramal-Shah, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 19, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Sheila Joy Stanislawski, Lawyer (Nepean)
A conduct hearing will be held from April 26-30, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, avocat (Ottawa)
Une audience de conduite est prévue pour le 26 avril 2021 à 10 h par vidéoconférence.
Timothy Shawn Blodgett, Paralegal (Belleville)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on April 27, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Mark Aaron Phillips, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 28, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
Omar Hasan Al Zahid, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 29, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Charles Thomas Polanski, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
An appeal by the licence applicant will be heard on April 30, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kenneth Robert Dunham, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on April 30, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gregory Leung Sing Chang, Lawyer (North York)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on April 30, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Issam Azzouggagh, Paralegal (Marmora)
Mr. Assouggagh engaged in professional misconduct by failing to provide a complete response to Intake & Resolution and by failing to cooperate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully cooperated, and for one month after that, and if he has not cooperated by July 16, 2021, he is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine. He is also ordered to pay $2,592 in costs to the Law Society.
Hammed Hassan-Olajokun, Paralegal (Ottawa)
Mr. Hassan-Olajokun engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with a Practice Audit and failing to cooperate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully cooperated, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Brian Robert Goldfinger, Lawyer (North York)
Mr. Goldfinger acknowledged that his CFAs contravened the Solicitor Act by allowing for the inclusion of costs awards in the calculation of the fee; he moved to convert the proceedings to an invitation to attend on the basis that the costs exclusion was about to be removed from the Solicitors Act. The panel held that, while no clients had actually been charged on the improper basis, the non-compliance was not mere oversight as the issue had been identified several years earlier in a practice review, and the important factor was compliance with the rules as opposed to the policy merits of the rules, which may change over time. Moreover, the misconduct admitted was precisely that which was alleged, and it would be improper to usurp the discretion of PAC to authorize a conduct application. The parties agreed that if a finding of misconduct was made, the appropriate penalty was a reprimand. The panel found no basis to reject the joint submission for being unconscionable and so imposed the reprimand.
Marina Ambridge, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Ambridge’s website included testimonials from clients that did not exist and had no disclaimer that past results are not indicative of future results. The panel found that Ms. Ambridge failed to act with integrity and failed to cooperate with an investigation when she attempted to mislead the Law Society about the testimonials on the website. It also found that she offered and marketed legal services through misleading means by indicating on her website that there was a “former judge on the team”. Finally, the panel found that Ms. Ambridge breached the prohibition against advertising second opinions, marketing legal services in a manner inconsistent with a high standard of professionalism. Because she has no prior discipline and removed the problematic advertising prior to the completion of the investigation, the panel accepted the joint submission of three-months suspension as reasonable.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Isaac sought to appeal an order made nearly two years earlier which quashed his application for reinstatement as an abuse of process and found him to be a vexatious litigant. The panel found that Mr. Isaac did not satisfy the test for an extension of time to appeal in that: he did not form an intention to appeal until six months after expiry of the appeal period; there was no explanation for the lengthy delay in bringing a leave application; there was no merit in the proposed grounds of appeal, many of which involved procedural objections that were not raised in the prior proceeding and none of which substantively challenged the conclusions that he was a vexatious litigant and that his reinstatement application was an abuse of process; and the justice of the case did not weigh in favour of granting leave. The panel therefore dismissed the motion.
- 16/04/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Nader Fathi, Paralegal (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 14, 2021.
Monika Tomaszewska, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 8, 2021.
Georgiana Stefania Masgras-Irshidat, Lawyer (Kitchener)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 6, 2021.
Carlos Alberto Ortiz, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 6, 2021.
Clifford Singh, Lawyer (Pickering)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 6, 2021.
Sukanta Saha, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 6, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Benito Bennardo, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held from April 19-21, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Khalid Aziz Sheikh, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on April 22, 2021 at 2:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on April 23, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The panel dismissed Mr. Isaac’s motion for leave to appeal an order after the appeal deadline.
Christopher Boyce Sherk, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Sherk engaged in professional misconduct by failing to be on guard against being duped, failing to serve his lender clients and acting against former clients. His licence is suspended for 75 days, he is ordered to complete ten hours of professional development, and he is ordered to pay $16,746 in costs to the Law Society.
Charles Jason Dudley, Paralegal (Chatham)
Mr. Dudley engaged in professional misconduct by failing to serve his clients to the standard of a competent paralegal, misapplying and/or mishandling $300 of client trust funds, failing to return a client’s file upon discharge, and failing to respond promptly and completely to the Law Society. His licence is suspended for one month, and he is ordered to pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Khan, in a conduct application, responded to the Law Society’s request to admit with generic denials of the truth and authenticity of facts and documents, relying on claims of privilege, prejudice and also asserting that only the trier of fact could make such determinations. The panel held that Mr. Khan’s responses did not satisfy Rule 11.3, which requires a specific basis be provided upon which the truth of each asserted fact and/or authenticity of each document was disputed, and that there was no merit to Mr. Khan’s position that Rule 11.3 was invalid, and so the facts and documents in the request to admit were deemed true and authentic for the purpose of the proceeding.
The panel also dismissed, for lack of evidence, Mr. Khan’s motion seeking a stay for breaches of his Charter rights, including the presumption of innocence and the ability to make full answer and defence, which were said to arise in part from the Law Society posting information about the conduct proceeding on its website and removing Mr. Khan from its Referral Service. The panel ruled it had no jurisdiction to order the Law Society to remove information about licensees subject to conduct proceedings from its website, which was in the public interest and up to Convocation, or to reinstate Mr. Khan to the Referral Program. The motions materials, which contained privileged client information, were ordered not public on consent of the parties, but the panel declined to extend its order to the hearing of the application on its merits, which was for the hearing panel to decide.
Kimberly Anne Bates, Paralegal (Ennismore)
The Law Society received five complaints from clients. Ms. Bates was asked to provide information, but many communications were not responded to; some replies raised concerns about her health. Prior to the hearing, Ms. Bates brought herself into compliance and agreed to participate in scheduled interviews to respond to any further questions. Therefore, the panel ordered a reprimand.
Ravi Kasi Raman, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Raman entered an agreed statement of facts and acknowledged that they established professional misconduct in that he: (a) was duped by a suspended licensee into registering mortgage transactions without adequate documentation; (b) worked with the suspended licensee without the express approval of the Tribunal; (c) failed to serve borrower clients by failing to report to them; and (d) withdrew funds from trust to pay his fees without first rendering an account. The panel accepted as reasonable the parties’ joint submission on penalty that Mr. Raman be suspended for three months, and for two years have practice restrictions and enhanced CPD requirements.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel reviewed and applied the Supreme Court of Canada’s approach to reasonable apprehension of bias from National Energy Board. The test is a two-fold objective test with the notional person being “reasonable” in a specifically defined way; the subjective feelings and beliefs of a party are not determinative. The panel reviewed the tables provided by Mr. Barnwell where he sets out that the chair did or said something which raised a reasonable apprehension of bias. The panel concluded that the interactions complained of would not, individually or collectively, lead a reasonable observer to find a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of the panel, and so the motion to recuse the panel was dismissed.
Fernand Abdul Majid, Lawyer (Burlington)
The allegations arose out of real estate transactions involving one client. Mr. Majid was candid and co-operative throughout the investigation and has stopped handling real estate transactions. The parties jointly submitted that there should be a nine-month suspension and restitution to those clients improperly charged disbursements. The panel found the misconduct had occurred over a number of years and was out of character, and that the joint submission was reasonable.
James Alexander Kay, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Kay was contacted by a client to draft and send a letter to his former employer, but the letter was not drafted or sent. Mr. Kay transferred money from his trust account to his general account before doing the work he was retained to do, or delivering an account. The panel found Mr. Kay’s precipitous withdrawal constituted a breach of the Rules of Professional Conduct. A hearing will be scheduled for submissions on penalty and costs.
Domenico De Rose, Paralegal (Toronto)
The same “palpable and overriding” standard for mixed fact and law should be applied to appeals to the Appeal Division. Appeals can proceed from the Appeal Division to the Divisional Court and the “reasonableness” and “palpable and overriding error” standards establish substantively similar criteria. The hearing panel made its findings on the basis of undisputed evidence. Arguments concerning denial of procedural fairness and abuse of process are heavily factual and are difficult to overturn on appeal. The appeal panel found that the hearing panel had clearly and correctly stated the applicable legal principles related to the stay motion. The test for procedural fairness is objective. The full panoply of trial-type procedural entitlements cannot be granted onto a preliminary discretionary screening decision. The appellant argued that the hearing panel erred in not converting the matter to an ITA and instead imposed a reprimand. This was a discretionary ruling and the appeal panel did not accept that there was a denial of natural justice, and so the appeal was dismissed.
- 09/04/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Timothy Kent Mobberley, Paralegal (London)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 31, 2021.
Benjamin Odinaka Chukwu Mbaegbu, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 29, 2021.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Scarborough)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 29, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Christopher Boyce Sherk, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 12, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Brooklin)
A conduct hearing will be held from April 12-16, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Toronto)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on April 13, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paul Anthony Wilkins, Lawyer (Toronto)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on April 14 & 15, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Hammed Hassan-Olajokun, Paralegal (Ottawa)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on April 16, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Issam Azzouggagh, Paralegal (Marmora)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on April 16, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Scott Andrew McEachern, Paralegal (Oshawa)
Mr. McEachern engaged in professional misconduct by failing to conduct himself in a way that maintains the integrity of the profession. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $11,497.50 in costs to the Law Society.
Jonhattan Da Rosa, Paralegal Applicant (New Tecumseth)
Mr. Da Rosa is not presently of good character, and so his licensing application is dismissed.
Elnaz Mazinani, Lawyer (North York)
The March 18, 2021 order is stayed pending the hearing of the appeal.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
The November 10, 2020 order is stayed until the disposition of the appeal.
Dominic De Rose, Paralegal (King City)
Mr. De Rose’s appeal is dismissed.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Whitby)
When Mr. Rapoport met with six potential clients, he disclosed his hourly rate but not that of his assistant. He was then hired but did not provide a written retainer until he had already exhausted the amount paid for a retainer. Furthermore, the written retainer did not provide a transparent description of the assistant’s function, qualifications or name.
The outcomes of allegations of incivility depend on context-specific considerations, and tone-deaf attempts at humour may be ill-considered but do not necessarily rise to the level of professional misconduct. However, the panel found that Mr. Rapoport’s offensive, vulgar, and misogynistic rant outside a public courtroom was both uncivil and amounted to professional misconduct. He was also vulgar and derogatory in a letter to another lawyer. Additionally, the panel found that Mr. Rapoport had not held information concerning a client in strict confidence, and had entered into a settlement in the name of his client without authorization, knowing that it included payments that his client had made clear he did not want to make. The panel concluded that deliberately ignoring, deflecting or failing to support an overwhelmed client does not meet the standard of a competent lawyer. A hearing on penalty and costs will be scheduled.
Francis John Chung, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Chung entered an agreed statement of facts and acknowledged that he engaged in nine particulars of professional misconduct as alleged when he, acting on various traffic court matters: entered guilty pleas on behalf of clients without instructions; misled the court and another licensee by stating he had client authorization; forged and commissioned false affidavits; knowingly worked with a non-licensee and a suspended licensee; failed to respond to communications from another licensee; and gave false information or no information to the Law Society when it sought to investigate these matters. The parties jointly submitted that a 12-month suspension was the appropriate penalty. The panel accepted that a lengthy suspension was within the range of reasonable penalties, considering the Aguirre factors, and suspended Mr. Chung for 12 months.
Golsa Ghamari, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Ms. Ghamari was sent more than 24 letters and e-mails requesting information and documents over a period of 23 months. Days before the hearing, Ms. Ghamari produced all but one of the requested items. A lawyer is obliged to respond promptly and completely to Law Society communications, and to act in good faith in meeting this obligation. Law Society employees are subject to a strict obligation of confidentiality with respect to any information obtained during an investigation. The panel suspended Ms. Ghamari’s licence indefinitely until she has satisfied the outstanding request. Once she has complied and all other suspensions have ended, she will be suspended for an additional month. Ms. Ghamari is also subject to fixed and conditional fines.
Jonhattan Da Rosa, Paralegal Applicant (New Tecumseth)
During the licensing process, Mr. Da Rosa disclosed criminal convictions for fraud over $5,000 and fraud under $5,000. A complaint was also received about his work on a legal matter. In 2004 he moved to the US and overstayed, returning to Canada in 2011. Mr. Da Rosa knew that his residence and employment in the United States were illegal. When he tried to return to the US in 2011, outstanding warrants were discovered. He received an 18-month conditional sentence on each of two charges. Mr. Da Rosa said he pled guilty to the criminal charges because he was given bad advice by his Legal Aid counsel. The panel found that the criminal convictions were not a “one off” and both were directly related to the provision of legal services at a time pre-dating the licensing of paralegals by the Law Society. On a balance of probabilities, the panel found that Mr. Da Rosa provided paralegal services without a licence. Because it concluded that Mr. Da Rosa failed to establish that he is currently of good character, the panel denied his application for a paralegal licence.
- 02/04/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Paul DioGuardi, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 30, 2021.
Gavin McNeill Grant, Lawyer (Owen Sound)
A notice of application regarding conduct and a notice of application regarding capacity were filed on March 29, 2021.
Benjamin Odinaka Chukwu Mbaegbu, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 29, 2021.
Elnaz Mazinani, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on March 26, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Maria Frances Marusic & Claudio Martini, Lawyers (Windsor)
Two conduct hearings will be held from April 4-9, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on from April 4-9, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Charles Jason Dudley, Paralegal (Chatham)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 8, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Michael Stephen Puskas, Lawyer (Hamilton)
The panel varies the order of March 10, 2020.
Brian Robert Goldfinger, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Goldfinger will pay $8,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Golsa Ghamari, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Ms. Ghamari engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with a Law Society investigation. Her licence is suspended until she has fully cooperated, and for one month after that. She is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine followed by another $2,000 fine if she has not cooperated within one month, and she is ordered to pay $8,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Bradley Ian Dinning, Paralegal (Chatham)
Mr. Dinning engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond to Law Society investigations regarding six complaints, as well as failing to file a compliance report within 30 days of his suspension. His licence is revoked and he is ordered to pay $10,980 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Regan claimed that the medical evidence concerning his condition was not available to him prior to the conduct and penalty hearings and he was therefore unable to present it to the hearing panel. Since his condition was not new, he was aware of the issues and had been receiving treatment since 2006, the panel found that he should have taken diligent steps to marshal and present this evidence at the hearing. The panel also found that the potential fresh evidence could not reasonably be expected to affect the result of the proceeding.
The panel further found that Mr. Regan’s grounds of appeal reiterated the arguments and defences he raised throughout the initial investigation and at the conduct and penalty proceedings. The panel applied the SCC decision in Vavilov, reviewing the Hearing Division decision in light of the Housen standards, and found no palpable or overriding error in the hearing panel’s reasoning regarding the finding of professional misconduct. Because the panel had found no reversible error in the penalty imposed, it dismissed the appeal.
Omar Shabbir Khan, Lawyer (Hamilton)
The Law Society sought its costs of Mr. Khan’s unsuccessful appeal against a finding that resulted in the revocation of his licence, specifically that he had submitted false invoices to Legal Aid Ontario. The Appeal Division had determined nine motions both before and during the appeal, all of which were resolved in favour of the Law Society. Mr. Khan argued that no costs should be payable, or in the alternative that they should be on a partial indemnity basis only, because of the novelty of the issues, his inability to pay and the reasonable expectation of the parties. The Law Society, relying on the principle that the professions should not pay for a lawyer’s unsuccessful appeal, sought costs in the amount of $50,000, reduced from its bill of costs of $60,000. The panel, rejecting the submission that the appeal raised novel issues, concluded that $40,000 with five years to pay was reasonable, considering the length and complexity of the proceedings and the absence of evidence regarding ability to pay.
Ezioma O. Nnorom, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Ms. Nnorom was administratively suspended in September 2018 for being in default of payment of her annual fees, and was re-instated the following month. More than two years later she brought a motion for extension of time to appeal, seeking to have the suspension order quashed or expunged from her record. The panel found that Ms. Nnorom did not form an intention to appeal within the 30-day appeal period, had no explanation for the lengthy delay, that there was no arguable basis for appeal, and that to grant an extension in these circumstances would render the rules, deadlines and summary order regime meaningless. It therefore dismissed the motion.
Manmohan Singh Hans, Paralegal (Caledon East)
Mr. Hans acknowledged that he engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond to communications from the Law Society and to produce requested information and documents, as well as by failing to maintain proper books and records. The parties agreed that, because Mr. Hans remained non-compliant, both a definite and indefinite suspension pending compliance was appropriate, but disagreed on which should begin first. The panel, while acknowledging that definite suspensions have traditionally begun first, noted that in recent years the order has been reversed; this change is appropriate as the indefinite suspension provides incentive to come into compliance, thereby serving as specific deterrence against ongoing misconduct, and is consistent with the Tribunal’s broad discretion to impose any order deemed appropriate upon finding professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming. The panel went on to state that conditional fines, which can also serve to encourage compliance, should be reserved for situations where the licensee has ceased to practice or provide legal services; as that was not the case here, the panel declined to order a conditional fine as sought by the Law Society.
Richard Boraks, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Boraks entered an agreed statement of facts and acknowledged that he engaged in professional misconduct by withdrawing monies from trust without first sending an invoice to the client, threatening a lawsuit contrary to his client’s instructions, and acting in a conflict of interest while failing to respect the rules governing joint retainers. The panel found professional misconduct and accepted the parties’ joint submission that Mr. Boraks be permitted to surrender his licence, considering that the mishandling of trust funds was particularly serious, involving $3.8 million, hundreds of clients and hundreds of transactions over approximately seven-and-a half years, and would warrant at least a lengthy suspension. The panel decided that, given Mr. Boraks’ discipline history, which, though dated, involved similar misconduct, more recent warnings following a spot audit, and his desire to cease practise, permission to surrender was reasonable.
Shawn Jafari, Paralegal (North York)
Mr. Jafari had promised to provide the requested information, but only provided a complete response just prior to the hearing. The parties provided a joint submission requesting a reprimand and the panel accepted this as within the proper range.
Richard Adedayo Odeleye, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
The panel found that the Law Society did not meet its burden to prove the allegations. Given the inconsistencies and conflicts in the evidence, in the context of the circumstances and reasonable probabilities at the time, the panel did not accept the testimony of two client witnesses as reliable, and so the application was dismissed.
- 26/03/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Davion Livingston Garvey, Lawyer Applicant (Hamilton)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on March 23, 2021.
Khalid Aziz Sheikh, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 22, 2021.
Laurie Austin Dakin, Lawyer (Pembroke)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 18, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
A conduct hearing will be held from March 29-30, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Bradley Ian Dinning, Paralegal (Chatham)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 29, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Michael Stephen Puskas, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on March 30, 2021 at 11:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, avocat (Ottawa)
Une audience d’avis de motion pour annuler une suspension interlocutoire est prévue pour le 31 mars 2021 à 10 h par vidéoconférence.
Dorsay Shafie, Paralegal (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on April 1, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Scott Andrew McEachern, Paralegal (Oshawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 1, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within an appeal by the licensee will be heard on April 1, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Claudius Tadeusz Croiset Van Uchelen, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 1, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Marina Ambridge, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Ambridge engaged in professional misconduct in a variety of ways related to advertising and marketing. Her licence is suspended for three months and she is ordered to pay $7,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Elnaz Mazinani, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Mazinani engaged in professional misconduct by failing to represent a client to the standard of a competent lawyer, breaching the confidentiality of two clients, depositing funds before rendering an account and failing to deposit client funds into her trust account, failing to encourage public confidence and respect for the administration of justice, failing to maintain the integrity of the profession, threatening a Law Society complaint and failing to act with integrity. Her licence is suspended for six months, she is ordered to pay $120,000 in costs to the Law Society, and she is ordered to continue to pursue The Osgoode Certificate in Family Law Skills and Practice.
Ben Timothy Peterson, Paralegal (Brampton)
Mr. Peterson engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with eight Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully cooperated and for one month after that. He is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine, followed by another $2,000 fine if he has not cooperated by April 20, 2021. He is also ordered to pay $6,900 in costs to the Law Society.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Hamilton)
The panel dismissed Mr. Regan’s motion for fresh evidence and his appeal.
Joseph Stéphane Langlois, Lawyer (Rockland)
Mr. Langlois engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating $3,192,739.75 of client trust funds, as well as exhibiting conduct unbecoming a lawyer. His licence is revoked, he is ordered to repay $2,105,959.82 to the Compensation Fund, and he is ordered to pay $32,200 in costs to the Law Society.
Omar Shabbir Khan, Lawyer (Hamilton)
The panel orders that Mr. Khan will pay $40,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Rajvinder Singh Grewal, Lawyer (Brampton)
Mr. Grewal, the respondent in a conduct application, sought to adjourn the hearing sine die pending the outcome of criminal proceedings which concerned the same conduct that was at issue in the discipline proceedings. The Law Society consented to the adjournment on the condition that Mr. Grewal provide an undertaking respecting his conduct and practice, which he did. The panel held that the public was sufficiently protected and an adjournment would protect Mr. Grewal’s right to a fair trial, which was expected to take place within a reasonable time.
Nader Fathi, Paralegal (Toronto)
The panel concluded that on the balance of probabilities the incidents between the complainant and Mr. Fathi took place as described by the complainant. Mr. Fathi was the complainant’s employer, and, applying the principles of the Human Rights Code and related case law, the panel found that the incidents constituted sexual harassment within the meaning of Rule 2.03 of the Paralegal Rules of Conduct. However, the panel found that the Law Society did not establish that the complainant’s placement position was terminated in reprisal for rejecting Mr. Fathi’s sexual advances. A date will be set for a penalty and costs hearing.
- 19/03/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Claudius Tadeusz Croiset Van Uchelen, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 15, 2021.
Andrew John Sanders, Lawyer (St. Thomas)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 11, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Maria Frances Marusic & Claudio Martini, Lawyers (Windsor)
Two conduct hearings will be held from March 22-26, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Marina Ambridge, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 22, 2021 at 2:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
A conduct hearing will be held from March 23-26, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Kimberly Anne Bates, Paralegal (Ennismore)
Ms. Bates engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with several Law Society investigations. A reprimand is ordered, along with attendance at an interview with the Law Society Investigator. She is also ordered to pay $3,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Julian J Hutchinson, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Hutchinson engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain proper books and records, mishandling and misapplying trust funds, failing to fulfill three undertakings and failing to promptly respond to communications from two lawyers. His licence is suspended for three months, he is required to provide a monthly bank reconciliation to the Regulatory Compliance Department for one year, and he is ordered to participate in a spot audit. He is also ordered to pay $4,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Stephen Hershel Shub, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Shub engaged in professional misconduct by failing to directly supervise his law clerk. A reprimand is ordered, along with $7,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Brian Robert Goldfinger, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Goldfinger engaged in professional misconduct by entering into two contingency fee retainer agreements that didn’t comply with the Solicitors Act. A reprimand is ordered, and costs will be determined subsequently.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Ryan Jesse Manilla, Lawyer (Vaughan)
Mr. Manilla signed his client’s name on five documents and filed the documents with the court. He admitted that when he filed the documents he knew that their signatures were false and that this constituted a breach of his duty of integrity. The presumption of revocation in cases involving knowing false representation in documents is firmly anchored in the Tribunal’s jurisprudence, but the panel found significant mitigating circumstances in this case to overcome the presumption of revocation: Mr. Manilla had no disciplinary history and had shown significant remorse. The panel concluded that a suspension of three months would both meet the ends of justice and maintain public confidence in the disciplinary process.
James Douglas Skinner, Lawyer (London)
Mr. Skinner acknowledged the facts and that he had engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond promptly and completely to requests for information sought by the Law Society in relation to a complaint concerning his services. He had made significant efforts in the week prior to the hearing to complete his response and sought to avoid suspension by completing his response within one week. The panel noted that the first requests had been made over a year prior and there was no evidence of exceptional circumstances; as such there was no reason to depart from the customary penalty, which the panel imposed, of an indefinite suspension pending compliance to be followed by a one-month definite suspension.
Ross Morley McLeod, Lawyer (Hamilton)
The panel found that Mr. McLeod did not meet the standard of a reasonably competent solicitor. He failed to inquire into the circumstances surrounding the execution and registration of mortgages to ensure they were valid, failed to require a full report and all related documentation to justify the instructions to issue a notice of sale under the mortgages, failed to account for, verify or justify the sums claimed in the notices of sale, took instructions from the mortgage broker and not from his clients on the various transactions, knowingly assisted in dishonest or fraudulent conduct, and acted in a conflict of interest and also against a former client. A hearing will be scheduled on penalty and costs.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society commenced two applications in against Mr. Regan, one in 2016 and one in 2017. The hearing of those applications did not proceed due to Mr. Regan’s pending appeals of his contempt of court conviction. In 2020, Mr. Regan commenced a court proceeding against the lawyer who represented him in the contempt of court proceedings and the interlocutory motion at the Tribunal. Mr. Regan asked that the Tribunal proceedings be stayed/adjourned pending the conclusion of the court proceeding. The panel concluded that the reputation of the administration of justice and the Law Society’s regulatory processes in protecting the public would be adversely affected if the stay/adjournment was granted, and so Mr. Regan’s motion was dismissed.
Ernest Guiste, Lawyer (Brampton)
The Law Society objected when, in the course of a conduct hearing, Mr. Guiste sought to introduce into evidence his PHC brief and correspondence with LSO counsel (the documents), and also advised he wished to call as a witness a Law Society Bencher who was a member of the Proceedings Authorization Committee (PAC) and had, prior to being elected, publicly criticized Mr. Guiste for the conduct that was the subject matter of the proceedings. The panel found that the documents were not relevant to either the professional misconduct alleged or Mr. Guiste’s claim that the proceedings were an abuse of process and that, in any event, pursuant to Rule 7.10 the PHC brief was confidential. The panel also found there was no reason to believe the that Bencher, who had recused himself from the PAC deliberation on whether to authorize a conduct application against Mr. Guiste, would have relevant evidence to give on any live issue at the hearing. Moreover, in both respects, Mr. Guiste was in breach of a PHC direction requiring that all documents and witness statements be disclosed one month prior to the commencement of the hearing. The panel therefore sustained the Law Society’s objections.
- 12/03/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Andrew John Sanders, Lawyer (St. Thomas)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 11, 2021.
Berina Gacanin, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 10, 2021.
Janet Allison King, Lawyer (Port Elgin)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 9, 2021.
Denise Rejeanne Simpson, Paralegal (Sarnia)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 9, 2021.
Rishma Visram Gupta, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 8, 2021.
Gregory Leung Sing Chang, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 5, 2021.
John Douglas King, Lawyer (Port Elgin)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 5, 2021.
Frances Khakhan, Paralegal (Maple)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 5, 2021.
Roberto Cucci, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on March 4, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Brian Robert Goldfinger, Lawyer (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 15, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Julian J. Hutchinson, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 16, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kimberly Anne Bates, Paralegal (Ennismore)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 17, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Dan Ronen, Lawyer (Thornhill)
A motion within a licensing hearing will be held on March 18, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
William Joseph Harry Bulmer, Paralegal (London)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 18, 2021 at 2:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Ben Timothy Peterson, Paralegal (Terra Cotta)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 19, 2021 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Joseph Stéphane Langlois, Lawyer (Rockland)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 19, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Mark Aaron Phillips, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing and a capacity hearing will be held on March 19, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Suzanne Elizabeth Deliscar, Lawyer (Brampton)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 19, 2021 at 2:00 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Roberto Cucci, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Hearing Division’s order of February 1, 2021, is stayed.
Nader Fathi, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Fathi’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the related good character matter.
Manmohan Singh Hans, Paralegal (Caledon East)
Mr. Hans engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with a Law Society investigation in two different ways, and for failing to maintain proper books and records. His licence is suspended until he has fully complied, and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Rupinder Garcha, Lawyer (Oakville)
Ms. Garcha engaged in professional misconduct in a number of ways, including by failing to respond to her clients, practicing while suspended, failing to serve clients, and breaching her duty of confidentiality, among other things. Her licence is suspended for four months and she is ordered to pay $6,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Cody Lang Watson, Lawyer Applicant (Ottawa)
Mr. Watson acknowledged that the onus was on him to establish his current good character in light of a 2013 conviction for criminal harassment. The panel found that Mr. Watson’s criminal conduct, involving breach of trust and a high level of moral blameworthiness, was serious, but that he was genuinely remorseful, had insight into the impact of his misconduct and had successfully addressed the underlying issues through counselling. Additionally, he was in a healthy long-term relationship and his conduct in the eight years since the misconduct occurred had been exemplary. The panel decided to grant the licensing application.
Rahul Malhotra, Lawyer Applicant (Mississauga)
Mr. Malhotra acknowledged there was an issue as to character and that the onus was on him to establish his present good character. In 2016 Mr. Malhotra had pleaded guilty in the US to the felony charge of making a false statement to a federal agent while being investigated by US immigration authorities for violating the terms of his work visa; he was sentenced to probation and deported to Canada. Mr. Malhotra’s 2019 application to be licensed in Ontario was supported by four senior members of the profession who all attested to his integrity, remorse and transparency regarding his misconduct. The panel found that Mr. Malhotra had taken full responsibility, demonstrated insight, remorse and rehabilitation, and concluded that he was presently of good character, and so granted his licencing application.
- 05/03/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Kenneth Robert Dunham, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 26, 2021.
James Cooper Morton, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 1, 2021.
Daniel John Thompson, Lawyer (Brighton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 2, 2021.
Yue Dong, Lawyer (Markham)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 3, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Nader Fathi, Paralegal (North York)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be heard on March 8, 2021 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 8 – 12, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Notice LCN66/16Licio Edward Cengarle, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 9, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Stephen Hershel Shub, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A conduct hearing and a working with or employing unauthorized persons hearing will be held on March 10, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Elnaz Mazinani, Lawyer (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 12, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Tuleep Viresh Fernando, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Fernando was found to have committed professional misconduct in his communications with predecessor and opposing counsel, a former client and others. His licence is suspended for two and a half months, ending May 15, 2021. He must completed four additional hours of CPD relating to equality, diversity and inclusion by December 31, 2021.
Rahul Malhotra, Lawyer Applicant (Mississauga)
The panel found that the applicant is presently of good character and eligible to be granted an L1 licence upon completion of the qualifications and other requirements set out in the Law Society Act.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Jassiganth Vamadevan, Lawyer Applicant (Mississauga)
Between 2009 and 2013, the applicant pled guilty and was sentenced in respect of five criminal offences, which raised concerns about his good character. The offences involved crimes of dishonesty, a lack of integrity and disregarding a court order. The Law Society took no position on the application. The applicant has grown and matured since the offences were committed and has made substantial efforts to change the path he was on, long before the need to prove good character at a hearing arose. The applicant demonstrated considerable remorse and made significant rehabilitative efforts and admitted the seriousness of his conduct and accepted full responsibility. The applicant was found to be presently of good character.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Act allows a panel to order a medical or psychological examination to protect the public interest and the power must be exercised cautiously as it is highly. A two-part test must be considered: first, a reasonable ground to believe that the licensee’s ability to practise law was or is incapacitated, second, the proposed examination will provide additional and significant assistance in determining the issue. The panel concluded that there are facts sufficient to reasonably believe the Lawyer’s ability is or has been incapacitated and that ordering a medical examination will provide additional and significant assistance in determining the issue of capacity.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel addressed several motions: a motion for disclosure, a motion to strike, a motion to stay the proceedings and several motions to quash summonses. The law of disclosure is well-settled: all relevant materials, whether admissible or not, must be disclosed unless they are the subject of a recognized privilege. The Lawyer failed to establish relevance and so the motion for disclosure was dismissed.
The Lawyer argued that there is significant overlap between the Tribunal and Federal Court proceedings such that the assessment motion should be adjourned or temporarily stayed until the Federal Court proceeding is concluded. The Law Society argued that its application is to determine whether the Lawyer is incapacitated under the Act and while the resolution of the Federal Court matter may inform this it will not be determinative. The amount of time which the Federal Court proceedings will take is unknown and the public interest requires that the Tribunal’s proceedings move forward expeditiously. The Lawyer’s motion for an adjournment/stay was dismissed. A stay of proceedings is a discretionary remedy only granted in exceptional circumstances. Bare allegations with no factual foundation are not sufficient. The Lawyer’s motion to strike was dismissed.
The Lawyer failed to provide a reasonable evidentiary basis that the proposed examination of summonses witnesses would provide any material or relevant evidence. The Lawyer’s summonses to various witnesses were quashed.
Richard Adedayo Odeleye, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
The majority of the panel applied the Supreme Court of Canada’s test in White Burgess and concluded that the witness was not qualified to give the expert opinion evidence. The dissent would have accepted the witness as an expert.
- 26/02/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Helen Mary McCullough, Lawyer (Keswick)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 25, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Tuleep Viresh Fernando, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 1, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 2 – 3 and 5, 2021 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Leon Stanley Wickham, Lawyer (Toronto)
A non-compliance hearing will be held on March 4, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Manmohan Singh Hans, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 5, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Mark Randolph McMackin, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 5, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Shawn Jafari, Paralegal (North York)
Mr. Jafari engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. He shall be reprimanded.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Vivek brought a motion for a stay, pending the hearing of his appeal against a finding that he failed to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. He also sought a stay of these proceedings as well as current investigations as an abuse of process. At the outset of the hearing, Mr. Vivek moved to recuse the panelist asserting that he was in a conflict of interest because he and/or his former and current law firm had a “close relationship with the government,” an agent of which had made the complaints concerning which the Lawyer refused to provide information. The motions were dismissed. Mr. Vivek filed no evidence and therefore failed to establish any evidentiary basis for his allegations or to meet the test for a stay pending appeal. The allegation of abuse of process, in any case, ought to be heard by a full panel on the appeal proper.
Paul Dominic Helsby Burgess, Lawyer (Campbellford)
Mr. Burgess entered into an agreed statement of facts and acknowledged that: (a) it constituted professional misconduct in that he failed to report having been charged with five indictable offences; and (b) he had been incapacitated by virtue of a substance use disorder. The panel accepted as reasonable the parties’ joint submission for a one-month suspension for the misconduct, and requirements for treatment and monitoring for at least three years for the medical condition with licence suspension in the event of non-compliance.
- 19/02/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Issam Azzouggagh, Paralegal (Marmora)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 18, 2021.
Nader Fathi, Paralegal (North York)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on February 17, 2021.
Bradley Ian Dinning, Paralegal (Chatham)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 16, 2021.
Mark Stansfield Trenholme, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 16, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Fernand Abdul Majid, Lawyer (Burlington)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 22, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Leon Stanley Wickham, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A non-compliance hearing will be held on February 23 & 24, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Sandy Alexander Zaitzeff, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 24, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Rupinder Garcha, Lawyer (Oakville)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 25, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Ryan Jesse Manilla, Lawyer (Vaughan)
The panel orders that Mr. Manilla will pay $6,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Isaac brought several motions in the context of three appeals from three applications. The three appeals will be joined if and when they are perfected. Grounds of appeal that were included in one of the appeals but which did not relate to the underlying Hearing Division file were struck. Mr. Isaac sought an order that the Rules of Practice and Procedure as they were prior to January 1, 2020 applied. The panel concluded that the Rules were procedural and the new Rules apply to all appeals from and after January 1, 2020. Mr. Isaac sought relief against filing transcripts, arguing that he would not be relying on them so he did not have to provide them. The panel did not accept this submission as a basis for waiving the requirement to file transcripts, stating that Mr. Isaac is required to file the transcripts to perfect the appeals and was given a deadline by which to do so, as well as file any motion materials for a request to extend time to file an appeal in another matter.
Tuleep Viresh Fernando, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Fernando brought a motion for disclosure of application counsel’s notes, as well as all LSO memos and guidelines setting out the role of investigation counsel vs. application counsel, asserting that the latter exceeded his role when he “re-opened” the investigation, thereby prejudicing Mr. Fernando’s ability to make full answer and defence. The motion was dismissed. The panel decided that Mr. Fernando did not raise a tenable argument of abuse of process or prosecutorial misconduct to ground his request for the disclosure sought, considering that speaking with witnesses prior to a hearing is necessary and does not amount to re-opening an investigation. The notes were also protected by litigation or work product privilege, and Mr. Fernando would be free to cross-examine the witnesses at the hearing regarding any changes in their statements. The panel granted the Law Society’s motion, on consent, to mark Mr. Fernando’s affidavit and factum not public and require him to file redacted versions.
- 05/02/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Georgiana Stefania Masgras-Irshidat, Lawyer (Kitchener)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 4, 2021.
Antoine Kheir, Paralegal (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 3, 2021.
Ryan Jesse Manilla, Lawyer (Maple)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on February 1, 2021.
Shahen Armen Alexanian, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 29, 2021.
Richard Boraks, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of withdrawal was filed by the Law Society on January 29, 2021.
Shawn Kelly Campbell, Lawyer (Georgetown)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 29, 2021.
Paula Lyn-Anne Horne Ferguson, Paralegal (Barrie)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 29, 2021.
Piero Perciballi, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on January 28, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Rajvinder Singh Grewal, Lawyer (Brampton)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on February 10, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 11 & 12, 2021 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Fredrick Barry Goodman, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Goodman engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a licensee by failing to act with integrity and to uphold the standards and reputation of the paralegal profession. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $125,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Ravi Kasi Raman, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Raman engaged in professional misconduct by failing to be on guard against being duped, working or associating with a suspended licensee without Law Society approval, failing to serve various borrower clients and paying himself fees from funds held in trust. His licence is suspended for three months, following which his licence will be restricted. He is also ordered to attend the Law Society’s Annual Real Estate Law Summits in 2021 and 2022, and pay $15,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Roberto Cucci, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Cucci engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended for one month and he is ordered to pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Ryan Jesse Manilla, Lawyer (Vaughan)
Mr. Manilla engaged in professional misconduct by mishandling five separate documents. His licence is suspended for three months.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Pradeep Bridglal Pachai, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Pachai’s licence had been revoked in November 2010 for defrauding his client. The panel considered whether he had overcome his earlier misconduct and had met the burden of demonstrating his present good character. The panel was satisfied that, though the conduct in question (unethical behaviour involving theft from a client) was the most serious misconduct a lawyer could commit, Mr. Pachai’s remorse and introspection were genuine. It determined that he is of good character and is entitled to a licence to practise law subject to any remaining licensing requirements. The panel also concluded that it was appropriate to place terms on his licence to maintain public confidence in the regulation of licensees as well as to facilitate re-entry into the profession.
- 29/01/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Jerry Michael Nesker, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 22, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Sheila Joy Stanislawski, Lawyer (Nepean)
A conduct hearing will be held from February 1-5, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a two conduct hearings (17H-065 & LCN66-16) will be heard on February 1, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ersio Amendola, Paralegal (Whitby)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on February 2, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ravi Kasi Raman, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 2, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Dorsay Shafie, Paralegal (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on February 5, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
James Douglas Skinner, Lawyer (London)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on February 5, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Danish Muhammad Munir, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Munir is not presently of good character, and so his licensing application is dismissed.
Pradeep Bridglal Pachai, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Pachai is presently of good character, and so is entitled to practise law, subject to any remaining licensing requirements and a variety of terms and conditions.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Jonathan Andrew Greenhill, Paralegal (Stoney Creek)
Mr. Greenhill did not attend the hearing though properly served, and the panel found in his absence that he had engaged in professional misconduct by failing to provide prompt and complete responses to communications from the Law Society regarding the disposition of his practice following administrative suspensions, and failed to co-operate with the ensuing investigation. It suspended Mr. Greenhill indefinitely until compliance was achieved, to be followed by a one-month suspension to begin after the completion of all other suspensions, and subject to a conditional fine of $1,000 if complete responses were not provided within six months.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Diamond brought a motion to stay the conduct proceeding on the grounds that there is selective prosecution and/or an abuse of process as well as an ongoing investigation of the same misconduct concerning his partner. The panel found that Mr. Diamond did not establish that the public interest in the fairness of the Tribunal’s process would be harmed if the proceeding were to go ahead, and that no tenable allegation of bad faith on behalf of the Law Society had been made out. It decided that, while it was commendable that Mr. Diamond remediated his marketing practices after consulting with the Law Society, remediation does not negate future conduct proceedings, and that it is not appropriate to indefinitely adjourn or delay the current proceeding on the chance that another conduct application against another lawyer may be brought at some future time. For these reasons, the panel dismissed Mr. Diamond’s motion to stay the proceedings.
Peter Robert Nicholas Harrison, Lawyer (Meaford)
Mr. Harrison entered an agreed statement of facts and admitted that he engaged in professional misconduct by: failing to deliver an account for services rendered before paying himself from funds held in trust and then, upon investigation, creating two accounts and representing to the Law Society that they had been delivered to the client prior to the funds having been withdrawn; practising while under administrative suspension; and failing to respond promptly and completely to investigations of the aforementioned matters. The panel decided to suspend Mr. Harrison for six months, reasoning that the knowing dishonesty in this case was to avoid punishment and not to obtain a benefit, which would have presumptively resulted in a penalty of revocation. The Law Society did not seek revocation but suspension of four to six months. The panel decided that the upper end of this range was appropriate, considering the serious nature and lengthy duration of the misconduct.
William Joseph Harry Bulmer, Paralegal (London)
Mr. Bulmer acknowledged that he engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond to requests for information in relation to a client complaint. The issue on penalty was whether he had complied by the time of the hearing so as to avoid a one-month suspension by sending the requested information and documents in an e-mail the evening prior, which had been received by duty counsel but not, for unexplained reasons, by the Law Society investigator or counsel. Following a break in the proceedings, the Law Society investigator testified that she had reviewed the contents of the e-mail and that it contained a substantive response to the requests, although she would have follow-up questions. The panel found that Mr. Bulmer had made a good faith attempt to come into compliance prior to the hearing and that in the unique circumstances of this case, a reprimand, rather than a one-month suspension, was the appropriate penalty.
Danish Muhammad Munir, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
In 2016 Mr. Munir had been given permission to surrender his licence to practise law after pleading guilty to one count of fraud under $5,000 for having extorted a vulnerable client. In 2018 he applied for re-licensing, presenting evidence at his 2020 good character hearing that he had been under the influence of alcohol at the time of the misconduct and has remained abstinent in the six years since, has taken stress management, legal ethics and other legal courses in addition to conducting volunteer work, and had a lawyer willing to support and supervise his re-entry to the profession. The panel found that, although Mr. Munir’s alcohol abuse disorder being in remission was an important factor, more was needed to meet his onus of demonstrating he was presently of good character: one course in stress management did not establish that he had sufficient coping skills to be able to handle the stress of legal practice, which was a factor in his past alcohol abuse. The panel further found that Mr. Munir’s insight into the seriousness of his misconduct was limited and did not reflect an appreciation of its impact on his vulnerable client who was betrayed by the one person he ought to have been able to trust without reservation. The panel concluded that Mr. Munir was not presently of good character and dismissed the application.
- 22/01/2021
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Elaine Faith Gordon, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 14, 2021.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on January 7, 2021.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Tuleep Viresh Fernando, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be heard on January 25, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ezioma O. Nnorom, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A motion within an appeal by the licensee will be heard on January 25, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Motions within three appeals by the licensee (18A-007, 19A-003, & 20A-009) will be heard on January 27, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ryan Jesse Manilla, Lawyer (Vaughan)
A conduct hearing will be held on January 27, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Muhammad Zia Malik, Lawyer Applicant (Mississauga)
A licensing hearing will be held on January 29, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Christian Chukwuedozie Chijindu, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel orders that Mr. Chijindu will pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Francis John Chung, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Chung engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with six investigations, failing to prevent the unauthorized provision of legal services, failing to perform services to the standard of a competent paralegal, knowingly misleading clients on three occasions, failing to act with integrity, behaving dishonourably and misleading the Law Society on two occasions, knowingly misleading the Court, failing to act with courtesy and good faith, and knowingly using the services of a suspended licensee to complete and submit court documents, including two forged affidavits. Mr. Chung’s licence is suspended for twelve months, starting when his suspension in a different Tribunal case ends. He is ordered to pay $15,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Stuart Cameron Murray, Lawyer (Simcoe County)
Mr. Murray engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating funds, failing to maintain financial records, and signing blank cheques. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to repay the Compensation Fund, plus pay $30,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Marie Carmen Jocelyne Paquette-Landry, avocat (Hawkesbury)
Me Paquette-Landry, s’est conduit d’une façon qui constitue un manquement professionnel. Elle a été donnée la permission de rendre son permis au plus tard le 25 janvier 2021 sans quoi son permis sera révoqué. Elle a été enjointe de verser au Barreau de l’Ontario des dépens montant de 3 000 $.
William Joseph Harry Bulmer, Paralegal (London)
Mr. Bulmer engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with an investigation by the Law Society. A reprimand has been ordered, and he is ordered to pay $2,785 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Bozdar Dragan Ljiljanic, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Ljiljanic had been criminally convicted of impaired driving and two counts of failing to stop at the scene of an accident, as well as one count of sexual assault arising out of a separate incident. He acknowledged that he engaged in professional misconduct in having failed to report the charges to the Law Society, as well as conduct unbecoming in having engaged in the criminal acts underlying the convictions. The panel found the alleged misconduct and accepted the parties’ joint submission for a penalty of six months’ suspension, reasoning that, although the offences were serious and caused harm to others, Mr. Ljiljanic had no discipline history, was not practising at the time, fully co-operated with the investigation and hearing, and it was unlikely that he would be involved in any similar behaviour in the future.
Wallace Robert Crowe, Lawyer (Fort Frances)
Mr. Crowe entered an agreed statement of facts and admitted that the facts constituted professional misconduct as alleged, in that he: removed over $250,000 in trust funds without authorization; used trust monies to pay personal debts leaving insufficient balances to cover client obligations; deposited cheques between two trust accounts to clear overdrafts knowing there were insufficient funds to cover them; and failing to keep books and records for his practice. Because the panel found no evidence of exceptional circumstances to justify departure from the presumptive penalty, it decided to revoke Mr. Crowe’s licence, ordering him to reimburse the Compensation Fund $26,582.87 with five years to pay.
Robert Bruce Gordon Stewart, Lawyer (Collingwood)
Mr. Stewart was suspended for failing to comply with the terms of a 2019 order. Although he had missed weekly appointments for ongoing monitoring, the panel found that Mr. Stewart’s explanation was reasonable and that the appointments were missed with cause, and so terminated the interim suspension.
Zijad Saskin, Lawyer (Niagara Falls)
Mr. Saskin, despite having been properly served, did not attend and was not represented, and was found in his absence to have failed to respond to six investigations, as well as failed to report on his practice as required by the By-Laws regarding suspended lawyers. Mr. Saskin had a previous finding of failing to respond to requests for information in five separate investigations for which he remained suspended. He was also administratively suspended for failing to file annual reports, meet CPD requirements and pay fees and insurance. The panel found that Mr. Saskin demonstrated an unwillingness to be governed by the Law Society and so revoked his licence, effective immediately.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
Mr. Culliton sought, on the day of hearing, an adjournment of the conduct hearing on the basis that counsel was ill and unable to attend. The panel found there was insufficient evidence to establish that counsel had been retained on the matter and so denied the request.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
In an action brought in Superior Court by a former client, Mr. Culliton was alleged to have wrongfully retained $100,000 from the proceeds of the sale of property. He failed to report this claim to the insurer as required by the Rules and then failed to co-operate in the Law Society’s ensuing investigation. Mr. Culliton also failed to respond to requests for information in relation to a separate complaint alleging that he was wrongfully retaining $300,000 in estate funds. Mr. Culliton had two prior findings of failure to co-operate, and remained indefinitely suspended by virtue of the second in which responses remained incomplete. The panel ordered an indefinite suspension pending compliance to be followed by a five-month suspension, and a $2,500 conditional fine if compliance was not achieved within two months.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
On the first day of a four-day conduct hearing, Mr. Robson sought a brief adjournment as his counsel was neither present nor available for the first two days owing to a scheduling conflict, despite having been present when the hearing dates were set two months prior. While noting the importance that hearing dates be respected, the panel also found that Mr. Robson had clearly made efforts to have counsel for the hearing. It reasoned that the right to counsel is integral to ensuring fundamental justice and fairness of the proceedings, and that the inconvenience to the witnesses could be minimized. Therefore, the panel granted a two-day adjournment and awarded $2,000 in costs to the Law Society in recognition of wasted resources.
Philip Alexiu, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Alexiu’s licence to provide legal services was restricted upon application by the Law Society after he had been criminally charged in relation to an alleged scheme whereby a court clerk altered the records of dispositions in Provincial Offences Act matters. Mr. Alexiu moved to cancel the interlocutory order based on a material change in circumstances, namely that the charges had since been withdrawn. The panel granted the motion and cancelled the order, which had been made on the basis of the outstanding charges and no other evidence.
Shiva Zareian Jahromi, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
Ms. Zareian Jahromi’s paralegal licence was revoked on September 18, 2020. She moved to stay the revocation pending her appeal hearing, but the panel decided that she did not meet the criteria for ordering a stay: it had doubts about the strength of her appeal and even assuming that she had serious grounds, found that she did not establish irreparable harm or a balance of convenience in her favour. Because Ms. Zareian Jahromi did not show that an order requiring the Law Society (and therefore the professions) to pay for the transcripts was necessary or justified, the panel dismissed the motions.
- 13/11/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
There were no new notices posted this week.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Paul Alexander Robson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be heard on November 16, 2020 at 12:00 p.m. The merits hearing will be held from November 17-20, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be heard on November 16, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
Peter Robert Nicholas Harrison, Lawyer (Meaford)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 17, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Michael Vincent Ross, Lawyer (Smiths Falls)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 18, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Frederick Barry Goodman, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 18, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be heard on November 19, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jassiganth Vamadevan, Lawyer Applicant (Mississauga)
A licensing hearing will be held on November 20, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Glenn Patrick Bogue, Lawyer (Ottawa/Toronto)
Two motions within two appeals by the licensee (19A-006 & 20A-002) will be heard on November 20, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Bozdar Dragan Ljiljanic, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Ljiljanic engaged in professional misconduct by failing to report criminal charges as soon as reasonably practicable and engaged in conduct unbecoming by driving while impaired, failing to stop at the scene of an accident, and sexual assault. His licence is suspended for six months, and he is ordered to pay $1,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Michael Edward Freeman, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Freeman is and has been incapacitated. He is granted permission to surrender his licence.
Jane Louise Slark-Perez, Paralegal (Hamilton)
Ms. Slark-Perez engaged in professional misconduct by providing and marketing legal services outside the scope of a paralegal, failing to maintain proper books and records, mishandling trust funds, failing to act with integrity, providing legal services while suspended and failing to cooperate with a Law Society investigation. Her licence is revoked and she is ordered to pay $25,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Elnaz Mazinani, Lawyer (North York)
The panel made numerous findings against Ms. Mazinani, including that she failed to take basic steps to familiarize herself with the applicable Rules in a family law appeal matter. She failed to communicate adequately with her client, her communications were misleading and untruthful, and she also breached solicitor-client confidentiality by serving an affidavit that contained privileged and confidential material without an explicit waiver of privilege. Additionally, she deposited funds into her general account after work had been done but before rendering an account, disobeyed a deputy judge’s order and so failed to encourage public confidence and respect for the administration of justice and improperly threatened a Law Society complaint against another lawyer. The panel found that Ms. Elnaz’s evidence was generally neither reliable nor credible. A penalty hearing is to be scheduled.
Jane Louise Slark-Perez, Paralegal (Hamilton)
The panel had earlier found that Ms. Slark-Perez had engaged in professional misconduct by marketing and providing legal services outside of the permissible scope of her licence, failing to act with integrity including by forging her client’s signature and make false statements in court documents, failing to maintain books and records, mishandling funds, providing legal services while suspended and failing to co-operate with an investigation. The panel applied the Aguirre factors and concluded that revocation was the appropriate penalty.
Daniel James William Matson, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
The parties submitted an agreed statement of facts where Mr. Matson admitted that the facts constitute professional misconduct: he allowed litigation files to languish; forged court and banking documents; failed to report or falsely reported to clients as to the status of their files; and issued cheques to clients from his own account or the firm’s to conceal the lack of progress on their files. Mr. Matson had been charged with 20 criminal offences related to his practice of law including forgery, obstruction of justice and impersonation. The parties made a joint submission for an order revoking Mr. Matson’s licence, which the panel accepted as being consistent with Tribunal jurisprudence in similar cases.
- 06/11/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Charles Thomas Polanski, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on October 30, 2020.
Pamela Jean Milne, Paralegal (Ajax)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on November 4, 2020.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on October 28, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Whitby)
A conduct hearing will be held from November 9-11, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Michael James Henry Woods, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing regarding two conduct applications (18H-068 & 20H-002) will be held from November 9-13, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ljiljanic Bozdar Dragan, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 9, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Roberto Cucci, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on November 11, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Paul Dominic Helsby Burgess, Lawyer (Campbellford)
A conduct and capacity hearing will be held on November 12, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
William Joseph Harry Bulmer, Paralegal (London)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on November 13, 2020 at 1:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Jonathan Andrew Greenhill, Paralegal (Stoney Creek)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on November 13, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Mark Louis Jacobson, Lawyer (Maple)
Mr. Jacobson engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with a Law Society request. A reprimand has been ordered, along with $3,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Hassan Fancy, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Fancy engaged in professional misconduct by failing to treat the court with courtesy and respect. His licence is suspended for two months and he is ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Marie Anita Lovell, Paralegal (Ajax)
Ms. Lovell engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate and failing to respond to two Law Society investigations. Her licence is suspended until she has cooperated and for another one month following that. She is also ordered to pay a $2,000 fine, another $2,000 fine if she hasn’t cooperated by November 30, 2020, and $3,795 in costs to the Law Society.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Scarborough)
Mr. David engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has cooperated and for another one month following that. He is also ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Omar Shabbir Khan, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Khan appealed from a decision and order of the Hearing Division that found that he had committed professional misconduct and revoked his licence. Mr. Khan sought to introduce additional documents that all pre-date the start of the hearing on the merits and could have been entered at that hearing. The LAO documents were subject to the deemed undertaking rule as they were disclosed as part of a wrongful termination action. The fresh evidence motion was dismissed. Mr. Khan argued that the hearing panel failed to consider the Law Society’s Mental Health Policy and erred in its analysis of discrimination under the Human Rights Code. The panel decided that the mere fact that an individual has a disability does not automatically establish discrimination. It further decided that the hearing panel correctly stated the applicable law and found on the evidence before it that Mr. Khan had not established a causal relationship between the disabilities and the misconduct at issue, and that the delay argument was not raised before the hearing panel and no evidentiary foundation was provided. The appeal panel stated that the findings of the hearing panel were reasonable based on the evidence before them, and so the appeal was dismissed.
Suresh Sriskandarajah, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
When he applied for licensing, Mr. Sriskandarajah disclosed that he pled guilty in the US to a single count of conspiring to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization. The panel heard considerable evidence about Mr. Sriskandarajah’s life leading up to his involvement with the LTTE, his arrest, conviction, incarceration and ultimate return to Canada. The panel found that Mr. Sriskandarajah truly understands a lawyer’s special obligation to work within the law and the need to examine his choices, consider the consequences and do that which is right. The panel concluded that the evidence of Mr. Sriskandarajah’s remorse was overwhelming. It found that Mr. Sriskandarajah recognized his mistakes, continued to work to make amends and be a productive and positive member of the community, reasoning that there is a place in the profession for individuals who have made mistakes and learned from them. The panel therefor found Mr. Sriskandarajah to presently be of good character
- 30/10/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Tara Florence Lyons, Lawyer (Barrie)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 26, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Richard Adedayo Odeleye, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 2, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 2, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Hassan Fancy, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 2, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Scarborough)
A summary conduct hearing continuation will be held on November 3, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Scott Andrew McEachern, Paralegal (Oshawa)
A hearing of two conduct matters (19H-019 & 20H-044) will be held on November 3, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Shayle Frederick Rothman, Lawyer (Vaughan)
An appeal by the Law Society will be held on November 3, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Hamilton)
An appeal by the licensee will be held on November 4, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Nader Fathi, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 4 & 5, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Michael Edward Freeman, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on November 5, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Claude Alain Burdet, avocat (Ottawa)
Une audience de conduite est prévue pour le 6 novembre 2020 à 10 h par vidéoconférence.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Omar Shabbir Khan, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Khan’s appeal from an order revoking his licence and awarding $20,000 in costs has been dismissed.
Priya Dubey, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
Ms. Dubey is presently of good character and, following the completion of all required qualifications, is eligible for a P1 licence.
Mark Wade Smith, Lawyer (Kanata)
Mr. Smith engaged in professional misconduct by failing to serve clients, mishandling client funds, failing to account to his client and failing to maintain proper books and records. His licence is suspended for two months, starting November 1, 2020, he is required to provide detailed monthly reconciliations, along with $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
David Wallace Dubinsky, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
Mr. Dubinsky, though properly served, failed to participate in the hearing at which the Law Society established that for two years he failed to respond in any way to Law Society requests for information in relation to eight separate investigations involving failing to serve, mishandling trust funds and practising while suspended by a 2017 order for failing to respond to the Law Society in respect of two previous investigations. The panel found that Mr. Dubinsky had demonstrated a complete disregard for his obligations as a licensee and unwillingness to be governed such that, with no evidence of mitigating circumstances, revocation was the appropriate penalty.
Ikechukwu Jonathan Awgu, Lawyer (Ottawa)
The panel decided that, though it is important that summary hearings proceed as expeditiously as possible, this was the first appearance for an application filed in September and granting a short adjournment to allow Mr. Awgu to be represented did not do any injustice to the public interest.
- 23/10/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Charles Jason Dudley, Paralegal (Chatham)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 20, 2020.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 19, 2020.
Dumitru Muraru, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on October 19, 2020.
Jennifer Michele Tremblay-Hall, Lawyer (Sault Ste. Marie)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 15, 2020.
Jan Jerrold Collins, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 15, 2020.
William Joseph Harry Bulmer, Paralegal (London)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 15, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Jeremy Dov Diamond, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on October 26, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a capacity hearing will be held on October 26, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ronald Joseph Loder, Lawyer (Vernon)
A conduct hearing will be held from October 27-29, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, avocat (Ottawa)
Une audience de conduite est prévue pour le 27 octobre 2020 à 10 h par vidéoconférence.
Richard Adedayo Odeleye, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 27, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
William Ndze Fuhgeh, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 28, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Marie Anita Lovell, Paralegal (Scarborough)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on October 30, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
Mark Louis Jacobson, Lawyer (Maple)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on October 30, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 30, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Priya Dubey, Paralegal Applicant (Gatineau, Q.C.)
Ms. Dubey is presently of good character, and after completing the requirements, is eligible for a P1 licence.
Pasquale Perrelli Jr., Paralegal (York)
Mr. Perrelli engaged in professional misconduct by failing to provide the Law Society with information on the disposition of his practice and failing to complete a Status Change Questionnaire, as well as by failing to respond promptly and completely to Law Society inquiries. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Kevin Shawn Klayman, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Klayman engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended until he has fully cooperated, and continuing after that for two months. He is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine, and another $2,000 fine if he hasn’t cooperated by November 15, 2020. He is also ordered to pay $8,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Pietro Monticciolo, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Monticciolo engaged in professional misconduct by marketing an ability to provide legal services on “all criminal matters”. A reprimand has been ordered, as well as $2,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Meredith Leigh Holmes, Lawyer (Abbotsford)
Ms. Holmes engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond promptly and completely to Law Society inquiries. Her licence is revoked, and she is ordered to pay $4,200 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
There were no new reasons posted this week.
- 16/10/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Martin Tweyman, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 9, 2020.
Brian Robert Goldfinger, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 13, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Pasquale Perrelli Jr., Paralegal (York)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 19, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Priya Dubey, Paralegal Applicant (Gatineau, Q.C.)
A licensing hearing will be held from October 19-21, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Mark Wade Smith, Lawyer (Stittsville)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 20, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 22, 2020 at 8:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kristin Ernest Hutton, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a capacity hearing will be held on October 22, 23 and 26, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on October 23, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
There were no new orders posted this week.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Derek Francesco Sorrenti, Lawyer (Vaughan)
The Law Society moved for interlocutory suspension/practice restrictions pending a hearing on allegations that Mr. Sorrenti, in the context of large-scale syndicated mortgage loans and investments (SMIs), acted in a conflict of interest, provided incompetent representation, mishandled trust funds and knowingly participated in fraud against his clients. The parties presented a joint submission that Mr. Sorrenti be prohibited from acting on SMI administration or as a trustee, except those involving a maximum of seven lenders in respect of residential or small commercial properties. The panel reasoned that there were no allegations of misconduct in respect of small-scale transactions and Mr. Sorrenti had been fully co-operative in the investigation and compliant with an interim interlocutory order in similar terms for seven months, such that the panel was satisfied that the limited restriction against large-scale SMIs sufficiently protected the public and was reasonable in the circumstances. The panel therefore imposed interlocutory restrictions on the terms that had been jointly proposed by the parties.
Codie Robert Mitchell, Lawyer Applicant (Ottawa)
Mr. Mitchell was found by the university’s Review Committee to have breached the Prevention of Sexual Violence Policy while at law school. Following a suspension for the remainder of that academic year and having participated in counselling as required by the dean, Mr. Mitchell completed his studies and articling year. The panel found that the misconduct consisted of one incident, which, while serious, appeared to be out of character, and found Mr. Mitchell’s expressions of remorse sincere and credible and indicative of empathy. Since there was no credible evidence of any previous or subsequent similar misconduct, the panel found Mr. Mitchell to be currently of good character.
Trung Thanh Do, Paralegal (Mississauga)
The Law Society of Ontario alleged that from January to May 2020 Mr. Do failed to co-operate with an investigation by not responding to written and oral communications. Mr. Do did not dispute this and attempted to explain his actions. The panel found that none of the explanations provided a lawful excuse for failing to respond to the Law Society. Mr. Do’s licence was suspended pending compliance with the requests and then for one month after. He was ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
- 09/10/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 6, 2020.
Jonathan Andrew Greenhill, Paralegal (Stoney Creek)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on October 1, 2020.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, avocat (Ottawa)
Un avis de motion pour annuler une suspension interlocutoire a été déposé le 30 septembre 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Richard Adedayo Odeleye, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
A conduct hearing will be held from October 13-15, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Claude Alain Burdet, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Une audience de conduite est prévue pour le 13 octobre 2020 à 10 h par vidéoconférence.
Meredith Leigh Holmes, Lawyer (Abbotsford, B.C.)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 14, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Pietro Monticciolo, Paralegal (Caledon)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 15, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Kevin Shawn Klayman, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 15, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Courtney Akinwale Kazembe, Lawyer (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 16, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ikechukwu Jonathan Awgu, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on October 16, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Darren Deenosan Kirupa, Lawyer (Ajax)
Mr. Kirupa’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing Mr. Kirupa’s conduct matter.
Codie Robert Mitchell, Lawyer Applicant (Dunsford)
Mr. Mitchell is presently of good character. Upon completion of all qualifications and requirements, he is eligible to be granted an L1 licence.
Richard Desmond Jackman, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Jackman failed to pay a $1,000 fine that was ordered by the Law Society Tribunal. A reprimand is ordered, along with $2,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The Law Society successfully brought a motion to quash Mr. Isaac’s application seeking reinstatement, then sought costs of the motion. The panel reasoned that the professions as a whole should not bear the costs of prosecuting licensee misconduct, since costs defray amounts paid by licensees through their fees. The hearing of the motion necessitated attendance over a number of days and the panel found that the amount sought by the Law Society was both reasonable and appropriate, and so Mr. Isaac was ordered to pay $5,423.19 in costs by December 31, 2020.
Harry Smith LaForme, Lawyer (Toronto)
A retired judge must establish that exceptional circumstances exist for the Hearing Division to grant approval to appear as counsel. Mr. LaForme is a retired judge of the Ontario Court of Appeal. He is Anishinabe of the Eagle Clan of the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation. His practice before being appointed as a judge concentrated on issues involving Indigenous law. Mr. LaForme asked to appear as counsel for three First Nations in two class actions against Canada regarding drinking water advisories. The panel found that, while Mr. LaForme has only been retired for less than two years, other factors alleviate some of the concerns surrounding a former judge appearing as counsel: he will be appearing in courts with which there is no previous relationship, he will be appearing in particular proceedings as opposed to more generally, and public confidence in the judiciary and the administration of justice may be enhanced as a result of the important need for Indigenous communities to advocate for their rights, which Mr. LaForme is uniquely placed to do. The panel decided that exceptional circumstances existed such that Mr. LaForme should be granted permission to appear as counsel in the two class proceedings and shall refrain from using his honourific.
Darcy John Daoust, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Daoust admitted that he had not responded to the Law Society investigator’s multiple requests for information. The parties provided a joint submission on penalty which the panel found to be reasonable, within the acceptable range of outcomes and not contrary to the public interest. Mr. Daoust was suspended immediately, to continue indefinitely until he has provided a complete response to the Law Society and followed by a one-month suspension once he has complied. He was also fined $2,000 and ordered to pay $6,000 in costs within one year.
Richard Adedayo Odeleye, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
The complainant alleged that Mr. Odeleye had sexually harassed her. He sought production of records held by Immigration, Refugee and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) in relation to the complainant’s application for special relief on humanitarian and compassionate grounds and records in possession of Canada Border Services Agency in relation to the complainant’s Pre-Removal Risk Assessment. Mr. Odeleye argued that the records relate directly to the complainant’s credibility. The Law Society opposed the motion for production of IRCC records, since the complainant did not consent to disclosure. The panel found that there were no relevant records to be disclosed in connection with the PRRA and so that aspect of the motion was dismissed. However, the panel found that Mr. Odeleye met the threshold test of likely relevance and so production of the records was necessary in the interests of justice. Since the vast majority of the documents produced by the IRCC do not meet the test for disclosure or were already disclosed to Mr. Odeleye, the panel ordered the IRCC to produce to the respondent specified documents or portions of documents as set out by the panel.
Charles Thomas Polanski, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Polanski, seeking an L1 licence, acknowledged that certain events in his past put the onus on him to establish his current good character. However, the panel found that other events, denied by Mr. Polanski as going to character, constituted prior misconduct as well and indeed demonstrated a five-year pattern of misconduct that continued to the hearing of his application. The panel found, most significantly, that Mr. Polanski tended to blame and attack others and demonstrated a lack of empathy and respect. Although he presented good character evidence, the panel decided that it did not address the character issues raised by the evidence of misconduct, nor did the counselling he undertook for two months or the apologies he made to the witnesses at the hearing. Since there was no medical or other evidence to establish the cause of his misconduct or that he had gained any insight into its impact on others, and because he had falsely and deliberately answered in his sworn application for licensing that he had not been accused of misconduct while attending a post-secondary institution, his licensing application was dismissed by the panel.
Claudio Martini & Maria Frances Marusic, Lawyers (Windsor)
The panel ordered that part of the allegations made against Mr. Martini be heard together with all of the allegations made against Ms. Marusic. The panel reasoned that the two allegations in each application overlap significantly, and hearing them together would avoid multiple proceedings and the risk of inconsistent decisions, as well as reducing the need for several witnesses to testify twice. Additionally, if they were not heard together, Mr. Martini would have to testify and be cross-examined about his actions during Ms. Marusic’s hearing before his own hearing had even started. Despite the factors weighing against joinder, namely that one hearing had already started and those hearing days would have to be repeated, adding to the delay in the proceedings, the panel found that the advantages of joinder outweigh the disadvantages. It therefore granted the motion to hear the allegations concerning clients D and G in File No. 20H-042 together with File Nos. 17H-153 and 19H-084.
- 02/10/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Kara Elane Noakes Hamilton, Lawyer (Victoria, B.C.)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 28, 2020.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on September 28, 2020
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Courtney Akinwale Kazembe, Lawyer (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on October 5, 6, 8 & 9, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ersio Amendola, Paralegal Applicant (Whitby)
A licensing hearing will be held on October 6 & 7, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Darren Deenosan Kirupa, Lawyer (Ajax)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be held on October 7, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Walter James Dick, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Dick is and has been incapacitated. His licence is suspended until he has met a variety of psychiatric conditions.
Shawn Andrew Gerry Hamilton, Lawyer (North Bay)
This proceeding has been converted to an Invitation to Attend, for the purpose of giving Mr. Hamilton advice concerning his conduct.
Charles Thomas Polanski, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Polanski made a false or misleading representation in connection with his licensing application, and is not currently of good character, and so his application is dismissed.
Suresh Sriskandarajah, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Sriskandarajah is presently of good character. Upon completion of all qualifications and requirements, he is eligible to be granted an L1 licence.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Further to its June 16, 2020 order, the panel orders that Mr. Isaac will pay $5,423.19 in costs to the Law Society.
Daniel James William Matson, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
Mr. Matson engaged in misconduct by misleading and failing to serve a number of clients, as well as failing to report to the Law Society that he was charged with criminal offences of a hybrid/indictable nature. His licence is revoked and he is ordered to pay $15,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Scarborough)
Mr. David declined to co-operate with the investigation, alleging that it was disturbing, unsavoury and troubling. He was reminded of his obligation to co-operate and failed to do so, asserting that he had not been served as required by the Tribunal Rules, even though he was provided with digital access to case material and had it e-mailed to him. The panel found that it was not reasonable to insist on personal delivery of hard copies if full disclosure can be accomplished electronically, and requested that a hearing be scheduled for submissions on penalty and costs.
- 25/09/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Darren Deenosan Kirupa, Lawyer (Ajax)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on September 23, 2020.
Patrick Leo Wayne Cusack, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding reinstatement was filed on September 22, 2020.
Dan Ronen, Lawyer (Thornhill)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on September 22, 2020.
Jay Ian Bernholtz, Lawyer (Markham)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 21, 2020.
Marie Anita Lovell, Paralegal (Scarborough)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 18, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, avocat (Ottawa)
Une audience de conduite est prévue pour le 28 septembre 2020 à 9 h par vidéoconférence.
Daniel James William Matson, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 28, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Suresh Sriskandarajah, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held from September 29 to October 1, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Christopher John Roper, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 29 and October 2, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Domenic De Rose, Paralegal (Toronto)
An appeal by the licensee will be held on September 30, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Pradeep Bridglal Pachai, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held on October 1, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Roberto Cucci, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on September 28, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Robert Bruce Gordon Stewart, Lawyer (Collingwood)
A terms dispute hearing will be held on October 2, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Richard Desmond Jackman, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A summary non-compliance hearing will be held on October 2, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Derek Francesco Sorrenti, Lawyer (Vaughan)
Mr. Sorrenti’s licence is restricted from use on work related to syndicated mortgage transactions, on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Sébastien Gauthier, parajuriste (Ottawa)
Me Gauthier s’est conduit d’une façon qui constitue un manquement professionnel en omettant de répondre sans délai et de manière complète a des demandes d’informations et de documents du Barreau. Son permis est suspendu de manière indéfinie jusqu’à qu’il ait fourni une réponse complète. Suite à cette suspension indéfinie, il sera suspendu pour une période supplémentaire de deux mois. Me Gauthier doit payer une amende de 4 000 $, et devra payer une seconde amende de 4 000 $ s’il ne fournit pas de réponse complète avant le 18 décembre 2020. Enfin, Me Gauthier paye au Barreau des dépens d’un montant totalisant 6 122,66$.
Shiva Zareian Jahromi, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Ms. Jahromi engaged in professional misconduct by misappropriating funds from trust, knowingly participating in fraudulent conduct, misleading a mortgagor, and several other mortgage-related offenses. Her licence is revoked, and costs are reserved to a later date.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Claudius Tadeusz Croiset Van Uchelen, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Croiset Van Uchelen’s unsupported request for adjournment for medical reasons was denied and he was found in his absence to have failed, over a period of eight months, to respond promptly and completely to requests for information concerning the investigation of two complaints – The Lawyer remained non-compliant at the time of the hearing and had a 2018 finding for the same misconduct – The panel ordered indefinite suspension pending compliance, to be followed by a two-month fixed suspension.
- 18/09/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Carrie Alexandra Fiorillo, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding capacity was filed on September 17, 2020.
Robert Bruce Gordon Stewart, Lawyer (Collingwood)
A notice of application regarding a terms dispute was filed on September 11, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Seth Kwame Awuku, Lawyer Applicant (Brampton)
A licensing hearing will be held on September 21 & 22, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Walter James Dick, Lawyer (Toronto)
A capacity hearing will be held on September 23, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 24 & 25, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Shawn Andrew Gerry Hamilton, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 25, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
No new orders were posted this week.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Fredrick Barry Goodman, Paralegal (Toronto)
The Ministry of the Attorney General (MAG), joined by the Law Society of Ontario (LSO), successfully moved to quash a summons issued by Mr. Goodman, the respondent in a conduct application. Mr. Goodman argued that no costs were appropriate because the evidence to have been brought by the summonsed witness was important to his defence, but the panel noted that Mr. Goodman’s arguments had already been raised and rejected on the motion, which was found to have been an abuse of process and prolonged by Mr. Goodman’s failure to identify the purported relevance of the vast amounts of material sought. Therefore, the panel awarded the requested costs of $5,850 to MAG and $5,000 to LSO, which had already been significantly discounted.
- 11/09/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Ikechukwu Jonathan Awgu, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 8, 2020.
Hezekiah Ho-Fai Tai, Paralegal Applicant (Markham)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on September 4, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Pradeep Bridglal Pachai, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held from September 14-16, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Neil Lawrence Boyko, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion to vary or cancel an interlocutory order hearing will be held on September 14, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Claudio Martini & Maria Frances Marusic, Lawyers (Windsor)
A motion within two conduct hearings will be heard on September 14, 2020 at 11:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Shiva Zareian Jahromi, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
A conduct hearing will be held on September 18, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Sébastien Gauthier, parajuriste (Ottawa)
Une audience sommaire de conduite est prévue pour le 18 septembre 2020 à 10 h par vidéoconférence.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Jane Ann Ledwon, Lawyer (Vancouver, BC)
The order made by Convocation on September 25, 1997 finding that Ms. Ledwon was incapable of practising law shall be varied based on a material change in circumstances. Ms. Ledwon is reinstated, dependent upon her complying with a variety of terms.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Further to its order of April 7, 2020, the panel orders that Mr. Isaac will pay $3,300 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Dora Elia, Paralegal (Innisfil)
Ms. Elia did not challenge any of the facts put forward by the Law Society and admitted professional misconduct. Because she committed a number of serious dishonest acts over a two-year period, demonstrating a lack of integrity and honesty and betraying her clients’ trust, the panel decided to revoke her licence. She was also ordered to pay $16,000 in costs over four years.
Benito Antonio Zappia, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Zappia acknowledged the facts alleged and that they constituted professional misconduct by failing, over a period of a year and a half, to provide responses to Law Society requests for information in relation to three investigations, failing to attend for an interview and failing to keep proper books and records since June of 2015. In accordance with the joint submission of the parties, the panel decided to suspend Mr. Zappia indefinitely until he responded fully and brought his books and records into compliance, after which he would serve a two-month suspension.
Elena Magayano Ross, Paralegal (St. Catharines)
Ms. Ross did not respond to communications about this hearing despite being served in accordance with the Rules, and so the hearing proceeded in her absence. Ms. Ross did not respond to numerous communications regarding three complaints and so the panel made a finding of professional misconduct. Her licence was suspended immediately and continuing indefinitely until she complied with the investigator’s requests. A fine of $2,000 was also ordered as well as a conditional fine of $2,000 if she did not comply by September 7, 2020. She was also ordered to pay $3,883 in costs.
Jeramy Silverstein, Paralegal Applicant (Mississauga)
Mr. Silverstein was convicted of criminal offences committed between 2003 and 2007. The offences and the period over which they occurred raised issues about his integrity and honesty. Many years had passed since the criminal conduct and he had expressed remorse, successfully made rehabilitative efforts and has exhibited good conduct since. The panel found Mr. Silverstein to be currently of good character and allowed the application, as well as imposed terms related to an undischarged bankruptcy that had been agreed upon by the parties.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The Law Society sought costs for its successful motion to dismiss Mr. Isaac’s appeal for delay. The approach to how to consider factors influencing costs was set out in Perrelli, and the panel decided that the Law Society incurred costs to bring this motion which should not have been borne solely by the professions. The underlying issue was moot and no effort was made to perfect the appeal for over three years. Because the bill of costs was reasonable, and the motion to dismiss the appeal was successful and was reasonably brought, the panel ordered that Mr. Isaac pay the Law Society $3,300 in costs.
- 04/09/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Sébastien Gauthier, parajuriste (Ottawa)
Un avis de requête sur la conduite a été déposé le 19 août 2020.
Martin Christopher Schulz, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 14, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Garry Stevens Pierre, Paralegal Applicant (Ottawa)
A licensing hearing will be held on September 8, 2020 at 9:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Derek Francesco Sorrenti, Lawyer (Vaughan)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be held on September 8, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Jeramy Silverstein, Paralegal Applicant (Mississauga)
Mr. Silverstein is currently of good character, and, following qualification and other requirements, he will be eligible for a paralegal licence, in accordance with a variety of terms.
Dean Randall Adema, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Adema engaged in professional misconduct and/or conduct unbecoming of a licensee by failing to comply with a judge’s order and failing to respond to a Law Society investigation. His licence is revoked and he is ordered to pay $12,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Michael Joseph Doupe, Lawyer (New Liskeard)
Mr. Doupe admitted to professional misconduct in the agreed statement of facts. He also submitted a character reference and letters from a clinical psychologist. The parties made a joint submission that Mr. Doupe be reprimanded and pay costs of $8,000, which the panel accepted.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
Mr. Culliton sought to adjourn the hearing to retain counsel and so that the hearing could occur in-person. The panel reasoned that the request was brought at the last minute and was not an exceptional circumstance, and, additionally, an in-person hearing was not required and if granted would result in a delay. Mr. Culliton argued that the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act stayed the deadline for him to comply with the Law Society’s requests for information, but the panel found that the regulation did not apply to investigations and did not excuse any failure to meet his regulatory obligations, and so suspended Mr. Culliton for two months and ordered that he pay $5,000 in costs within 18 months.
Luigi Savone, Lawyer (Ottawa)
This was the second appeal in this matter. This appeal panel had allowed Mr. Savone’s appeal from a finding of knowing participation in fraudulent real estate transactions and substituted the finding that Mr. Savone failed to be on guard against becoming a tool or dupe of his client. It also allowed Mr. Savone’s appeal from the penalty of revocation. The appeal panel now considered the issues of the penalty for that substituted finding and the costs of this appeal. The Law Society submitted that the penalty should be a 12-18 month suspension, while Mr. Savone submitted that there were substantial mitigating factors that should result in either a reprimand or, at most, a two-month suspension. The Law Society sought $25,000 in costs for this appeal, while Mr. Savone sought costs of $27,005.41. The panel imposed a three-month suspension, denied any costs to Mr. Savone, and awarded costs of $25,000 to the Law Society.
- 28/08/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Roberto Cucci, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 24, 2020.
Richard Desmond Jackman, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding non-compliance was filed on August 21, 2020.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 20, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Dean Randall Adema, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 31, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Darcy John Daoust, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Daoust engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with several Law Society investigations. His licence is suspended until he has fully cooperated with the investigations and for one month after that, and he is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine and another $2,000 fine if he has not cooperated by September 21, 2020. He is also ordered to pay $6,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Luigi Savone, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Further to its order of July 19, 2019, Mr. Savone’s licence is suspended for three months, and he is ordered to pay $25,000 in costs.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
Mr. Culliton engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with and respond to a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended for two months and continuing after that until he has fully cooperated with the investigation, and he is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Fredrick Barry Goodman, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Goodman’s conduct of litigation with his former client was characterized by the court as a vexatious and abusive “avalanche of litigious proceedings”. The panel found that Mr. Goodman took every conceivable step to delay, obstruct and avoid a resolution of the matter, which spanned 26 months and required 23 appearances, flouted numerous court orders, abused the process of the courts and blamed everyone but himself while failing to realize that he was required to facilitate an examination of his accounts. The panel found that Mr. Goodman failed to act with integrity and brought disrespect upon the professions and the administration of justice as a whole. A penalty hearing is to be scheduled.
- 21/08/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, avocat (Ottawa)
Un avis d’appel a été déposé par l’avocat le 14 août 2020.
Neil Lawrence Boyko, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 17, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Stuart Cameron Murray, Lawyer (Kitchener)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held from August 26-27, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Charles Thomas Polanski, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held from August 24-28, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
David Wallace Dubinsky, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
Mr. Dubinsky committed professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with eight Law Society investigations, several instances of failing to serve a client to the standard of a competent lawyer, failing to deposit funds into his trust account, failing to notify clients of his suspension, practising law while suspended, failing to file a Compliance Report while suspended and transferring fees out of his trust account without delivering a billing to his client. His licence is revoked and he is ordered to pay $15,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Bradley Ian Dinning, Paralegal (Chatham)
The panel denied Mr. Dinning’s request for an adjournment to retain counsel, reasoning that the request was late, Mr. Dinning did not show that he had made timely reasonable efforts to retain counsel, and because this was a summary hearing. Mr. Dinning conceded that he engaged in professional misconduct by not providing a complete and timely response. The panel decided that, although a one-month suspension may be the usual order where there is a second instance of failing to co-operate, the misconduct alleged here preceded the earlier finding and penalty against Mr. Dinning, and so the panel ordered a reprimand and $5,152.52 in costs to the Law Society.
Ranjit Singh Gill, Paralegal (Brampton)
Mr. Gill did not attend the hearing, though properly served, and was found in his absence to have failed to respond to requests for information in relation to two complaints. Mr. Gill had a 2018 finding for the same misconduct for which he remained non-compliant and suspended, and so the panel ordered indefinite suspension, pending compliance with the investigations, a two-month suspension to begin after completion of all other suspensions, a $2,000 fine and an additional $2,000 fine if compliance was not achieved within two months.
- 14/08/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Melanie Gloria Christine Zopf, Paralegal (Scarborough)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 11, 2020.
Rahul Malhotra, Lawyer Applicant (Mississauga)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on August 11, 2020.
Zijad Saskin, Lawyer (Niagara Falls)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 10, 2020.
Rajvinder Singh Grewal, Lawyer (Brampton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 10, 2020.
Ishwar Roopnarine Dharneshwar Sharma, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 10, 2020.
Mark Louis Jacobson, Lawyer (Maple)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 10, 2020.
Jennifer Mae Dietrich Suzor, Lawyer (Windsor)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 7, 2020.
Ghazal Qureshi, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 6, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Jeramy Silverstein, Paralegal Applicant (Mississauga)
A licensing hearing will be held on August 19, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Jane Louise Slark-Perez, Paralegal (Hamilton)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 20, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Darcy John Daoust, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 21, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Trung Thanh Do, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 21, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Elena Magayano Ross, Paralegal (St. Catharines)
Ms. Ross committed professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with and respond to three Law Society investigations. Her licence is suspended until she has fully cooperated with the investigations, and for one month after that, and she is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine, another $2,000 fine if she has not cooperated by September 7, 2020, and $3,883 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Shiva Zareian Jahromi, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
The panel found that Ms. Jahromi engaged in misconduct in relation to four private mortgage transactions involving two different clients, engaging in fraudulent conduct, being a party to misappropriation and misrepresentation, improperly dealing in mortgages and misleading mortgagors. Ms. Jahromi also commissioned a statutory declaration without having administered the oath or affirmation and without being present when it was signed. The panel decided that, as she was acting in her capacity as a paralegal when she commissioned the statutory declaration, she engaged in professional misconduct when she did so. A penalty hearing will be scheduled.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Hamilton)
The panel found that the Tribunal has the authority to order that an appeal be heard by videoconference. It reasoned that oral evidence, including when credibility is at stake, can be fairly and effectively heard by videoconference, and further, that the administration of justice cannot wait for the pandemic to be over. Therefore the appeal will proceed by videoconference.
- 07/08/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Ljiljanic Bozdar Dragan, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on August 5, 2020.
Jan-Lee McKenzie Hughes, Paralegal (Hagersville)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 31, 2020.
Marina Ambridge, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 30, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
David Wallace Dubinsky, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
A conduct hearing will be held on August 13, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Richard Adedayo Odeleye, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
A conduct hearing will be held from August 10-14, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Leon Wickham, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
The Law Society’s motion for a continued adjournment is granted. The restrictions on Mr. Wickham’s licence to practise law will continue to be varied.
Harry Smith LaForme, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Honourable Mr. LaForme, a retired judge, is permitted to appear as counsel on two class actions due to exceptional circumstances.
Alpesh Patel, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Patel committed professional misconduct by failing to respond to a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended for one month and continuing after that until he has fully cooperated with the investigation.
Alpesh Patel, Lawyer (Toronto)
Further to the above order, the panel orders that Mr. Patel will pay $3,500 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Tang Trang Nguyen, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Appeal Division dismissed Mr. Nguyen’s appeal of the Hearing Division decision to revoke his licence and pay $10,000 in costs. Mr. Nguyen argued against costs on the appeal saying that the appeal raised a novel issue, but the panel concluded that the novel issue was resolved based on well-established precedents and that the costs incurred by the Law Society in responding to a lengthy and complex appeal should not be borne solely by the professions. Therefore, the panel ordered Mr. Nguyen to pay $20,000 in costs in five annual installments.
William Leonard Turner, Lawyer Applicant (Ottawa)
Mr. Turner had a history of criminal convictions and serious misconduct. The misconduct occurred between 2000 and 2016 and an arrest warrant remained outstanding. The panel found that Mr. Turner was not remorseful and did not have material insight into his own misconduct. There was also no evidence of successful rehabilitation with respect to the misuse of alcohol or more generally. Finding that Mr. Turner failed to demonstrate good character at the time of the hearing, the panel dismissed the licensing application.
Todd Elliott Speck, Lawyer Applicant (London)
Mr. Speck’s motion for production was dismissed. The Law Society sought costs of the motion and asked that the licensing hearing be stayed until the costs had been paid. Mr. Speck filed a large amount of material, seeking production of documents, many of which did not exist, nor did he modify his request after this became clear. The Law Society provided no precedent for staying a licensing hearing pending payment of costs for a motion. The panel ultimately decided that the Law Society’s bill of costs was fair and reasonable. Given the pandemic, the panel gave Mr. Speck one year to pay $6,400 in costs.
Alpesh Patel, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Patel requested an adjournment at the hearing, saying that he would be able to comply within a week and also that he had been ill. The panel found no exceptional circumstances to grant a postponement and denied the request; the evidence showed Mr. Patel had not fully co-operated with the Law Society. Mr. Patel had no prior disciplinary record. The panel ordered a one-month suspension followed by an indefinite suspension. The Law Society sought costs, including costs for investigator time, but the panel found that the amount sought by the Law Society was high for a short and straightforward summary hearing, and, taking all of the factors into account, including a reasonable portion of the lawyer and investigator time claimed, awarded costs of $3,500.
- 24/07/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Patricia Colleen Williams, Paralegal Applicant (North York)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on July 22, 2020
Murray Delbert Stroud, Lawyer (Pickering)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 16, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Harry Smith LaForme, Lawyer (Toronto)
A retired judge appearing as counsel hearing will be held on July 30, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Michael Joseph Doupe, Lawyer (New Liskeard)
Mr. Doupe sent correspondence to a client that was offensive and inconsistent with the proper tone of professional communications. He also failed to treat the court with courtesy and respect and failed to treat others with whom he had dealings in the course of his practice with courtesy. Mr. Doupe was reprimanded and ordered to pay $8,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Terry Michael Walman, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Walman was a director, officer, and part owner of a mortgage corporation. He was also one of its lawyers. A mortgage was registered in favour of the corporation, but it refused to advance the funds when it realized that the appraised value of the property did not meet its criteria. Mr. Walman admitted that he engaged in professional misconduct by refusing to discharge the mortgage once it was clear that the loan transaction would not proceed. Despite knowing that the mortgagor was in financial difficulty and that she required clear title to sell the property, he refused to discharge the mortgage unless the mortgagor signed a release and paid various fees and expenses, not all of which actually had been incurred. The panel accepted the joint submission of the parties and ordered a one-month suspension.
Maria Louisa L. Diaz, Lawyer (Unionville)
The parties completed an agreed statement of facts and Ms. Diaz acknowledged that the facts constitute proof of professional misconduct as alleged. The parties jointly submitted that a reprimand should be imposed. Despite earlier discipline, the Law Society submitted that the prior discipline is unrelated to a failure to respond to the Law Society. Ms. Diaz co-operated in bringing the matter forward and medical documentation was filed that showed she had medical issues and was actively being assessed and treated. The respondent was reprimanded and costs of $3,750 are payable to the Law Society.
Brian Curtis Smith, Paralegal (Kitchener)
Mr. Smith did not participate in the hearing. He did not communicate with the Law Society except to indicate that he would not be providing the information requested. Mr. Smith engaged in professional misconduct when he failed to reply promptly and completely to the various communications from the Law Society. A one-month suspension was ordered, to be followed by an indefinite suspension until a complete response is provided. Fixed and conditional fines were also ordered as it appears that Mr. Smith does not intend to return to the profession. Costs of $4,500 are payable to the Law Society.
Marie-José Beauplan-Mann, Lawyer (Dundalk)
Mme Beauplan-Mann n’a pas d’antécédents disciplinaires, mais n’avait pas mis en conformité ses livres et registres à la date de l’audience. Les titulaires de permis sont tenus de tenir en permanence leurs livres et registres financiers conformément au règlement administratif. Les circonstances atténuantes de Mme Beauplan-Mann, bien que compréhensibles, n’expliquent pas le défaut de longue date de tenue conforme de ses registres. Une suspension ferme d’un mois, et une suspension indéfinie jusqu’à ce que les livres et les registres soient en ordre. Des dépens d’un montant de 9 000 $ seront versés au Barreau.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, Lawyer (Ottawa)
M Wansome a omis de répondre sans délai et sans rien omettre aux demandes de renseignements du Barreau dans le cadre de deux enquêtes. Le permis de l’avocat sera suspendu pour un mois, une fois qu’il aura fourni tous les renseignements demandés, et après l’achèvement de la suspension interlocutoire actuellement en vigueur. Il y aura une amende conditionnelle de 2 000 $ pour l’encourager à se conformer aux demandes en suspens, et une amende fixe de 2 000 $ pour tenir compte du fait que la suspension ne prendra pas effet si son permis est révoqué dans le cadre d’une autre procédure. M Wansome doit payer des dépens d’un montant de 6 000 $, tel que demandé par le Barreau ce qui représente une réduction de plus de 50 % par rapport au temps consacré. C’est un montant élevé pour une audience sommaire contestée d’une demi-journée, mais cette affaire impliquait une durée inhabituelle avec quatre conférences de gestion de l’instance et quatre conférences préparatoires à l’audience avant que les parties ne parviennent à l’audience sommaire.
- 17/07/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
No new notices were posted this week.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Michael Joseph Doupe, Lawyer (New Liskeard)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 21, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Elnaz Mazinani, Lawyer (North York)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 22, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Claudius Tadeusz Croiset Van Uchelen, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 23, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Ranjit Singh Gill, Paralegal (Brampton)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 24, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Bradley Ian Dinning, Paralegal (Chatham)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 24, 2020 at 2:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Scarborough)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 24, 2020 at 3:00 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Marie-Jose Beauplan-Mann, avocate (Dundalk)
Mme Beauplan-Mann s’est conduite d’une façon qui constitue un manquement professionnel et est indigne d’un titulaire de permis, en omettant de tenir ses livres et registres en conformité avec le règlement administratif adéquat. Mme Beauplan-Mann est suspendue pour une période d’un mois et restera suspendue jusqu’à ce qu’elle ait mis en conformité ses livres et registres. Elle versera au Barreau des dépens d’un montant totalisant 9 000 $.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, avocat (Ottawa)
M. Wansome s’est conduit d’une façon qui constitue un manquement professionnel en omettant de répondre sans délai et sans rien omettre aux demandes de renseignements du Barreau dans le cadre des deux enquêtes. M. Wansome est suspendu de manière indéfinie, et ce jusqu’à ce qu’il fournisse une réponse complète et qu’il ait complété toutes les suspensions actuelles de son permis. Il devra payer une amende déterminée de 2 000 $ au Barreau, ainsi qu’une amende additionnelle de 2 000 $, s’il ne fournit pas une réponse complète d’ici le 5 aout 2020. M. Wansome doit verser au Barreau des dépens de 6 000 $.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
William Ndze Fuhgeh (Ottawa) The Law Society brought two sets of allegations against Mr. Fuhgeh. The first alleged improper conduct toward his client, other lawyers, the Federal Court and the administration of justice in his representation of the client on an application for judicial review of an employment tribunal’s decision. The second set alleged harassing conduct toward the complainant (his ex-partner), including the issuance of threatening and unfounded complaints for the purpose of influencing family law litigation between them concerning their son. The panel found that all of the allegations of professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming had been proven, except improperly alleging that the chair of the tribunal whose decision was under review was biased against the lawyer’s client and filing unfounded professional discipline complaints against his ex-partner. In dismissing this latter allegation, the panel held that s. 36(3) of the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991 (RHPA), which precludes any evidence of what takes place in an RHPA regulatory proceeding from being adduced in a civil proceeding, applied in these circumstances, where the other proceeding was before the independent adjudicative tribunal of another regulator.
Adam Barry Sheps (Toronto)
Mr. Sheps brought a motion for an order preventing public access to the entirety of a medical report. The Tribunal is bound to uphold the open court principle. The Tribunal has discretion to make a not public order, non-disclosure order or publication ban and must exercise this discretion cautiously. The public is entitled to review and consider the evidence on which the panel determined that Mr. Sheps was incapacitated and issued an order setting out the conditions he would need to meet to return to practising law. Minor redactions were permitted that protect the privacy of third parties and the respondent’s childhood history.
Adam Barry Sheps (Toronto)
Mr. Sheps self-reported criminal harassment charges against him. An interlocutory suspension order followed and the Law Society launched a capacity application. Based on the agreed statement of facts and underlying psychiatric assessment report, the panel accepted the joint submission of the parties as reasonable. Mr. Sheps was found to be incapacitated within s.37 of the Act and is incapable of meeting his obligations as a licensee on account of mental illness. Mr. Sheps’ licence is suspended until he has provided the required medical evidence. No costs were awarded.
Khalid Aziz Sheikh (Mississauga)
Mr. Sheikh admitted to engaging in multiple forms of professional misconduct, which included acting while in a conflict of interest, failing to render accounts to a client, rendering fees that were unreasonable, failing to pay HST, and sharp practice. Some of his misconduct was egregious, particularly failing to advise a client that he was charging for work done for the client’s sister, his conflict of interest in doing so, and the steps he took not only to obtain default judgment, but also a garnishment, without advising opposing counsel. Mr. Sheikh did not have a discipline history and he co-operated in the investigation. He also executed an agreed statement of facts, saving the expense of a lengthy hearing. Mr. Sheikh’s financial difficulties may have unduly influenced his actions. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission and imposed a two-month suspension. The order also provided for restitution to the client and for continued monitoring by the Law Society of Mr. Sheikh’s HST filings.
Gerald Wayne Anthony Koski (Windsor)
Mr. Koski acknowledged that he engaged in professional misconduct by failing, over a period exceeding nine months, to respond to requests for information in relation to a complaint. He provided a complete response the day prior to the hearing and, pursuant to a joint submission of the parties, was reprimanded.
Tyler Anthony Jones-Bechard (Windsor)
Mr. Jones-Bechard did not attend the hearing, though properly served, and was found in his absence to have engaged in professional misconduct by failing to reply to communications from the Investigations Department. Mr. Jones-Bechard submitted a letter setting out his medical history, but it was not taken into account on penalty as requested, since the Law Society had no opportunity to test the information through cross-examination. The panel imposed an indefinite suspension pending compliance, to be followed by a one-month fixed suspension to begin at the end of all administrative suspensions, a fine of $2,000 plus a conditional fine of $2,000 if compliance was not achieved within one month.
Agostino-Austin Persico (Vaughan)
Mr. Persico acknowledged that he engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond promptly and completely to requests for information in relation to the investigation of five complaints. Although he did provide some information, the responses remained incomplete. Mr. Persico received an indefinite suspension pending compliance, to be followed by a one-month suspension.
Derek Francesco Sorrenti (Vaughan)
The Law Society successfully resisted a motion for production of a report on the basis that the report was solicitor-client privileged. Both parties sought costs of the motion. While the Society might have provided information about the report to Mr. Sorrenti earlier than it did, its conduct was not so serious as to give rise to a claim for costs against it. Given the compressed timelines in this interlocutory suspension motion, it was reasonable for the Society to limit the early details it gave about a report it believed to be privileged. As the Society was successful on the motion, it was entitled to costs. Of the $12,000 it incurred under the tariff, the Society requested costs of $5,000. The Society was awarded costs of $2,500, considering the reasonable expectations of the parties for a motion intended to be argued in a summary manner; and the Society’s lack of success in one of its arguments.
Ghazal Qureshi, Paralegal (Toronto)
Ms. Qureshi admitted that she failed to produce information and documents, including books and records, as requested by the Law Society. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission of a reprimand as reasonable. This was Ms. Qureshi’s first discipline proceeding. She had complied with the Society’s requests for information and documents. Ms. Qureshi admitted misconduct and participated in the joint submission, which expedited the hearing of this matter. She has taken responsibility for her actions and was remorseful.
- 10/07/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Samir Nagaty Ha Roman, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 8, 2020.
Diana Linda Stokes, Lawyer (Nepean)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 8, 2020.
Behdad Hosseini, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 3, 2020
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Alpesh Patel, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 17, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 17, 2020 at 1:00 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
No new orders were posted this week.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Christopher John Roper, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society asked to amend the notice of application to correct a typographical omission in two particulars, to correct a By-Law reference in another, and to make additions to five particulars. The purpose of particulars is to provide a licensee with sufficient detail so that they may understand the allegations against them and are able to prepare and respond fully. Mr. Roper understood the nature and scope of the particulars and no prejudice arises from correcting the errors. The additions to five particulars were not necessary. The allegations were clear and it is not necessary to layer sections of the By-Law.
The evidence is clear that Mr. Roper received fees on account of services not yet rendered. They were not immediately paid into a trust account. Mr. Roper misappropriated client funds by using them to pay rent and not returning the money when asked to do so. This was a deliberate taking and retaining client funds for his personal benefit. Mr. Roper failed to provide services identified in his retainers in a timely manner or at all. He was neither honest nor candid concerning deadlines and the progress of work. Mr. Roper charged amounts for fees and disbursements that were not fair or reasonable. A lawyer has a duty to deal professionally with a complaint made to the Law Society. A hearing will be scheduled for submissions on penalty and costs.
Jeffrey Michael James Rehner, Lawyer (Chatham)
Mr. Rehner admitted that, over a period of a year in a family law matter, he failed to serve his client; promptly answer communications from opposing counsel; and be honest and candid with his client, by not fully disclosing what happened in respect of two motions in the proceeding. Mr. Rehner also failed to promptly return retainer funds to the client when she terminated the solicitor/client relationship. As Mr. Rehner continually sent communications to his client to the wrong address, court orders issued that resulted in termination of the client’s child support, an order for costs, and an order to repay significant child support. The client’s wages were garnished at 50% for 11 months. The client had to retain new counsel to address the orders and advance her position in the litigation. The Lawyer’s mother was undergoing significant health concerns and he was primarily responsible for her care; after she passed away, Mr. Rehner had a hard time functioning in the following months. He had no support staff and backlogs in his files resulted, before he recovered. Based on a joint submission, Mr. Rehner was suspended for two months.
Priashna Singh, Lawyer (Brampton)
Ms. Singh engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with an investigation. In a previous matter, she had received an indefinite suspension, which was cured one day after it was ordered. The concept of progressive discipline required a one-month suspension in this case. There was no joint submission, but the parties had agreed that costs be set at of $2,151, which did not include any amount for costs of the investigation. Since 2019, it has been the Law Society’s policy not to seek costs for investigators’ time, which is no longer even recorded. The panel was of the view that, as longstanding jurisprudence has held that the professions should not bear the cost of discipline proceedings establishing a licensee’s misconduct, disciplined lawyers should also bear the expense of the investigation related to the proceeding. The panel’s order added $250 to the costs requested by the Law Society, for a total of $2,401. The addition was a nominal amount, at the lowest possible end, for the recovery of the steps taken by the investigator.
Robert Arthur Otto, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Otto failed to co-operate with an investigation. Progressive discipline was applicable, even though this matter differed from the one for which he had been punished previously. Though Mr. Otto presently expressed remorse, that had not motivated compliance in the past year – Mr. Otto was suspended for two months, continuing indefinitely until there was compliance. The start of the suspension was deferred for two months: first, because current professional practices were materially affected by the COVID-19 pandemic; and secondly, reasons had recently been received in a protracted custody trial, in which his client was successful and was seeking costs. That client would face unwarranted prejudice, if Mr. Otto was unable to make the cost submissions. The Law Society sought costs of $2,905.50, not including the investigation. Based o the principle that costs are intended to impose the expense of the proceeding on the disciplined licensee, not the profession, Mr. Otto was ordered to pay a nominal amount of $250 for investigation costs, bringing the total costs award to $3,155.50.
Joseph Benoit Eugene Pierre Gauthier
M. Gauthier a admis a) ne pas avoir répondu aux demandes d’information du Barreau quant à la disposition de sa pratique, y compris l’emplacement des dossiers et des fonds fiduciaires et b) ne pas avoir répondu aux communications du Barreau et a négligé de fournir le dossier de son ancien client. M. Gauthier a un dossier disciplinaire antérieur. La formation a accepté la proposition conjointe des parties sur la sanction qui prévoyait une suspension de quatre mois, une amende déterminée de 5 500$ payable dans l’année, et une amende conditionnelle de 2 000$ payable si l’avocat ne fournit pas de réponse complète aux demandes faites par le Barreau avant la date fixée.
- 03/07/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Omar Hasan Al Zahid, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on July 2, 2020.
Christopher Charles Watkins, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 30, 2020.
A notice of application regarding capacity was filed on June 30, 2020.
Cody Lang Watson, Lawyer Applicant (Ottawa)
A notice of referral for hearing was filed on June 29, 2020.
Rupinder Garcha, Lawyer (Oakville)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 26, 2020.
Ramandeep Singh Gill, Paralegal (Caledon)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 26, 2020.
James Alexander Kay, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 24, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Benito Antonio Zappia, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 10, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Claudius Tadeusz Croiset Van Uchelen, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A conduct hearing will be held on July 10, 2020 at 1:00 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Maria Louisa L. Diaz, Lawyer (Unionville)
Ms. Diaz engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. Ms. Diaz shall be reprimanded and was ordered to pay $3,750 in costs to the Law Society.
Brian Curtis Smith, Paralegal (Kitchener)
Mr. Smith engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with and respond to Law Society investigations. Mr. Smith was suspended for one month, to continue indefinitely until a complete response has been made. Mr. Smith was fined $2,000 and ordered to pay costs of $4,500 to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Roland Spiegel, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
The Law Society was seeking its costs of two motions: 1) its own motion to dismiss the appeal for delay; and 2) Mr. Spiegel’s earlier motion to stay the appeal. The Law Society sought $8,000 in costs. Considering Mr. Spiegel’s age of 74 years, his limited financial means (relying for income solely on Old Age Security), his inability to work due to his current disabilities, and that the motions were relatively straightforward, he was ordered to pay costs of $6,000 to the Law Society.
David A. Wallbridge, Lawyer (Timmins)
Mr. Wallbridge filed a motion to extend time to file a notice of appeal of an administrative suspension. Although Mr. Wallbridge’s intention to appeal was not formalized during the 30-day period, his actions do not display blatant disregard, and to that end, assist in explaining the delay. The delay did not cause any prejudice to the Law Society. The Lawyer showed an arguable ground of appeal. The motion was granted and the Lawyer may serve and file his appeal within 30 days.
Michael Stephen Puskas, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Puskas applied to vary the term of a 2013 order requiring treatment by a stipulated therapist or another professional recommended by that therapist, until such time that the therapist deemed treatment no longer to be necessary. The therapist ceased treatment without opining that treatment was no longer needed and did not approve of the subsequent therapist retained by Mr. Puskas, with the result that he was unable to comply with the order. The parties jointly submitted revised terms that provided more flexibility in the choice of therapist, with specified reporting requirements and the stipulation that non-compliance would result in suspension. The panel found that the term in the 2013 order had the unintended consequence of preventing Mr. Puskas from completing therapy and that this constituted a material change in circumstances that justified the variation. Order varied in accordance with the parties’ joint submission.
Suzanne Bernadette Quinn, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
Ms. Quinn admitted that she failed to respond promptly and completely to numerous communications from the Law Society regarding a client complaint. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission that a reprimand was appropriate. Costs of $2,750 payable to the Law Society were ordered.
Franklyn Scott Taylor, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Taylor admitted that: (1) he failed to participate in a previously-ordered practice review and (2) he failed to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. The Law Society sought a six-month suspension, given Mr. Taylor’s discipline history, while he argued that a reprimand was sufficient. Mr. Taylor had two previous findings of professional misconduct for failure to co-operate regarding complaints and failure to respond to the Law Society. He was suspended for one month for the first finding; the principle of progressive discipline requires a penalty longer than a one-month suspension this time. Considering Mr. Taylor’s remorse, his medical condition, and that he admitted misconduct, he was suspended for four months.
- 26/06/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Elena Magayano Ross, Paralegal (St. Catharines)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 23, 2020.
Trung Thanh Do, Paralegal (Mississauga)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 19, 2020.
Franklyn Scott Taylor, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of appeal was filed on June 16, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Garry Stevens Pierre, Paralegal (Ottawa)
A licensing hearing will be held on June 29 and 30, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Gerald Wayne Anthony Koski, Lawyer (Windsor)
Mr. Koski engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with and respond to an investigation of the Law Society regarding two complaints. The panel ordered a reprimand and costs to the Law Society in the amount of $3,850.
Roland Spiegel, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Spiegel was ordered to pay $6,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Tyler Anthony Jones-Bechard, Lawyer (Windsor)
Mr. Jones-Bechard engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with an investigation by failing to reply promptly and completely to communications from the Investigation Services Department. He was suspended immediately, to continue indefinitely until he has provided a complete response and then for a period of one month. Mr. Jones-Bechard was fined $2,000 and ordered to pay costs of $2,226 to the Law Society.
Agostino-Austin Persico, Lawyer (Vaughan)
Mr. Persico engaged in professional misconduct by failing to provide complete responses to five Law Society investigations into his conduct. He was suspended immediately, to continue until one month after meeting specified conditions. Mr. Persico was ordered to pay costs of $8,000 to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The Law Society moved to quash Mr. Isaac’s reinstatement application. His suspension had ended, so there was no live issue to be decided in the application. The panel was not persuaded to exercise its discretion to hear the case. An application for reinstatement is not a forum for re-litigation or appeal of the findings of another panel of the Hearing Division. The motion was granted and the reinstatement application was dismissed. A schedule was set for costs submissions, if any.
Adam Christopher White, Lawyer (Keswick)
Mr. White admitted that by ignoring various communications and failing to respond to those communications, he committed professional misconduct. After a first hearing, the penalty portion was adjourned and during the adjournment the lawyer responded completely to the two investigations. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission that a reprimand was appropriate in the circumstances. Costs of $7,000, payable to the Law Society, were ordered.
Gregory Stephen Neinstein, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel accepted a joint submission, pursuant to which it dismissed the application, following an invitation to attend and Mr. Neinstein’s attendance to receive advice. The panel did not make a finding of misconduct. As the Law Society agreed to the order and was not asking that the matter be determined on its merits, the Tribunal was not interfering with prosecutorial discretion. The Society had made two allegations of improper advertising but it withdrew one, making the misconduct different and less serious than what was originally alleged. The remaining allegation was at the extreme low end of the spectrum. On his firm’s website, the Lawyer had placed a logo from a business listing website indicating that, among lawyers, he was one of the “Three Best Rated.” Mr. Neinstein had neither applied for nor paid for that designation. He had been fully co-operative and had removed the advertising when the Law Society requested that he do so. It was arguable that use of this logo might violate the advertising rules and that Mr. Neinstein could benefit from attending before the panel to receive advice. The application was dismissed.
- 19/06/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Harry Smith LaForme, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of referral for hearing – retired judge appearing as counsel was filed on June 17, 2020.
Vivek David, Lawyer (Scarborough)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 17, 2020.
Ryan Jesse Manilla, Lawyer (Vaughan)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 17, 2020.
Lisa Elizabeth Simone, Paralegal Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of referral for hearing – licensing was filed on June 16, 2020.
Joseph Stéphane Langlois, Lawyer (Rockland)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 16, 2020.
Bradley Ian Dinning, Paralegal (Chatham)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 15, 2020.
Gerald Keith Culliton, Lawyer (Stratford)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 15, 2020.
Fariborz Haghighat Jou, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 12, 2020.
Raymond Joseph Yvon Lachapelle, Avocat (Hawkesbury)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 10, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Tyler Anthony Jones-Bechard, Lawyer (Windsor)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 23, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Codie Robert Mitchell, Lawyer Applicant (Ottawa)
A licensing hearing will be held on June 23, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
Gerald Wayne Anthony Koski, Lawyer (Windsor)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 25, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Brian Curtis Smith, Paralegal (Kitchener)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 26, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Maria Louisa L. Diaz, Lawyer (Unionvile)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 26, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Suzanne Bernadette Quinn, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
Ms. Quinn engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with an investigation and respond promptly and completely to investigatory communications. The panel ordered a reprimand and costs to the Law Society in the amount of $2,750.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The Law Society’s motion for an order quashing Mr. Isaac’s notice of application for reinstatement was granted.
Ghazal Qureshi, Paralegal (Toronto)
Ms. Qureshi engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with an investigation by failing to produce information and documents despite requests from the Law Society’s investigator. The panel ordered a reprimand and costs to the Law Society in the amount of $3,000.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Vanee Harichandran Senthooran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Ms. Senthooran admitted failing to maintain proper books and records and mishandling trust funds by repeatedly withdrawing money for fees without ensuring that her trust records reflected what funds she was holding for which client. She had since rectified her books and records. Ms. Senthooran did not misappropriate or take money to which she was not entitled; rather, she did not properly account for and keep track of money being transferred. The problem lasted five years and issues had been identified over the course of three practice reviews. As there were over 213 transfers of $1,000 and she continued to make 86 transfers after being directed not to do so, imposing a reprimand and a fine would be inappropriate. Considering Ms. Senthooran’s compliance and her significant compelling personal circumstances, she was suspended for one month and was ordered to participate in a spot audit after resuming her practice.
Jane Louise Slark-Perez, Paralegal (Hamilton)
The panel found that Ms. Slark-Perez had engaged in professional misconduct. She advertised a full array of legal services including those outside of the paralegal scope of practice. Ms. Slark-Perez did not maintain a trust account or various other records. She cashed a bank draft from a client before work had been completed or billed. Ms. Slark-Perez acted without the knowledge or consent of a client, and made false statements to a court, including forging the client’s signature on a false document. She attended Landlord and Tenant Board matters after she was suspended in 2017. A hearing date shall be set for submissions with respect to penalty and costs.
- 12/06/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Michael Edward Freeman, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding capacity was filed on June 11, 2020.
Meredith Leigh Holmes, Lawyer (Abbotsford, B.C.)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 10, 2020.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 9, 2020.
Ross Morley McLeod, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 9, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Codie Robert Mitchell, Lawyer Applicant (Ottawa)
A licensing hearing will be held on June 15, 2020 at 10:30 a.m. and on June 16, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Agostino-Austin Persico, Lawyer (Vaughan)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 19, 2020 at 2:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Marie-Jose Beauplan-Mann, avocat (Dundalk)
Une audience sommaire de conduite est prévue pour le 19 juin 2020 à 10 h par vidéoconférence.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Jamie John Patrick Thompson, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Thompson engaged in professional misconduct and/or conduct unbecoming a licensee by misappropriating escrow funds, making false representations to the complainant’s officers that he was holding a certain amount of money in his trust accounts, and withdrawing more money from his trust account for certain clients than was being held for those clients. His licence is revoked, he is ordered to pay $34,464 in costs to the Law Society, and to repay the Law Society Compensation Fund.
Adam Barry Sheps, Lawyer (Toronto)
On consent of the parties, Exhibit 2NP is marked not public.
Gregory Stephen Neinstein, Lawyer (Toronto)
The proceedings were converted to an invitation to attend for the purpose of receiving advice, without any finding of misconduct.
Dora Elia, Paralegal (Innisfil)
Ms. Elia committed professional misconduct by failing to serve her clients on multiple occasions. Her licence is revoked and she is ordered to pay $16,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Glenn Patrick Bogue, Lawyer (Toronto)
On his appeal, Mr. Bogue brought two motions seeking 10 heads of relief. The panel informed Mr. Bogue that it could not consider his motions on the merits without the required materials, but he would not co-operate in arranging for the exchange of the necessary materials. The majority of the relief and grounds raised by Mr. Bogue in these motions related to issues considered in other proceedings, where they had been rejected. In the proceedings, Mr. Bogue raised his voice continually, refused to let others speak, and spoke over them whenever they tried. He addressed the participants disrespectfully and issued threats of legal proceedings against the panel. The panel found that, though Mr. Bogue’s motions did raise three new issues, the motions should be dismissed on the basis that his conduct constituted an abuse of process (without prejudice to his ability to bring the motions again). The panel decided that, should Mr. Bogue wish to proceed with his motions, he would have to file the necessary materials, conduct himself in a civil manner, and pursue only matters that had not already been determined.
Trinity Chanel Aleong Magee, Paralegal (Etobicoke)
The panel found that Ms. Aleong Magee had engaged in professional misconduct. She was charged in February and December 2017 with uttering forged documents and obstructing justice, but she only advised the Law Society of the February charges. She had been suspended on an interlocutory basis in March 2018 and failed to comply with her regulatory obligations relating to her suspension. She declined to co-operate with the Law Society while the criminal charges were pending and, once she was convicted, she refused to communicate with the Law Society and the Tribunal. Therefore, the panel accepted the Law Society’s submission that Ms. Aleong Magee’s licence be revoked, effective immediately. The panel also ordered costs of $12,700 to be paid to the Law Society.
David William Walkling, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Walkling entered into an agreed statement of facts acknowledging that between 2015 and 2020 he failed to keep proper books and records. He had made efforts during that time, following spot audits in 2015 and 2018, to bring his records into compliance, and had agreed to freeze the trust account(s) at issue; by the time of the penalty hearing the Law Society was satisfied that Mr. Walkling was in compliance. The joint submission for a reprimand and quarterly monitoring in the first 18 months with a spot audit was accepted by the panel as reasonable, given the absence of any discipline history over a 40-year career and Mr. Walkling’s co-operation throughout. The panel ordered costs of $5,000 to be paid to the Law Society within one year.
- 05/06/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Brandon Keven Rooney, Lawyer (Stratford)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 4, 2020.
Pasquale Perrelli Jr., Paralegal (York)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 3, 2020.
Brian Richard Madigan, Lawyer Applicant (Mississauga)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on June 3, 2020.
Alpesh Patel, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on June 1, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Jamie John Patrick Thompson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 8, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Gregory Stephen Neinstein, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on June 8, 2020 at 11:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Codie Robert Mitchell, Lawyer Applicant (Ottawa)
A licensing hearing will be held on June 10, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Dora Elia, Paralegal (Innisfil)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 10, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Suzanne Bernadette Quinn, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 12, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
Ghazal Qureshi, Paralegal (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on June 12, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Gerald Nsamba, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Nsamba is presently of good character. He will be granted an L1 licence, subject to some terms and conditions.
Bradley Ian Dinning, Paralegal (Chatham)
Mr. Dinning engaged in professional misconduct by failing to provide a prompt and complete response to communications from the Law Society’s investigator. His licence is suspended until he has fully responded to the investigator, and for one month after that. If he has not responded fully by July 24, 2020, he is ordered to pay a $2,000 fine. He is also ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Shayle Frederick Rothman, Lawyer (Vaughan)
The panel found, in earlier reasons, that except for one minor mistake in a 2016 mailer, none of the allegations were established. The standard for awarding costs against the Law Society is extremely high, and the panel stated that the Law Society should not be deterred from bringing an application by fear of an adverse cost award, though it should be deterred from bringing or continuing an unjustified proceeding. It further reasoned that, where there is no evidence of bad faith or improper purpose, the analysis must focus on whether there were grounds or reasonable justification to bring the application. The panel found that three of the allegations were brought without reasonable justification and were unwarranted from their inception, and that 65% of Mr. Rothman’s costs were attributable to the unfounded allegations. Using the rates set out in the Tariff, the panel awarded $46,000 in costs against the Law Society.
Davidson Usifoh, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Usifoh was convicted of 11 separate criminal offences: five counts of fraud, including using a fake driver’s licence since 2000 or 2001, and six counts of laundering the proceeds of crime in relation to an e-mail phishing scam. He agreed that this constituted conduct unbecoming a licensee, and the panel accepted the parties’ joint submission and revoked Mr. Usifoh’s licence.
Gerald Nsamba, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
Mr. Nsamba engaged in several instances of plagiarism in successive years at law school, some of which were after he had already been caught and disciplined. He had a very difficult background, having lost both his parents at a young age, lived in a refugee camp, immigrated to Canada with no formal education or ability to speak English, and committed to financially supporting his family in Uganda as he studied and worked in Canada. The panel determined that the misconduct, which occurred within a span of 12 months, was uncharacteristic of Mr. Nsamba; he had been under incredible stress and lacked a support system. Character evidence from various members of the community who had known him prior to and since the misconduct consistently attested to his honesty, candour, empathy, strong moral fibre and good deeds. Mr. Nsamba was very remorseful, had completed his practicum with high accolades and had developed a support network and coping strategy. The panel determined that he was presently of good character and granted him an L1 licence under terms and conditions relating to a mentorship arrangement for his first two years of practice.
Frederick Barry Goodman, Paralegal, Toronto
The allegations of misconduct against Mr. Goodman arose out of three small claims court actions between him and a client. Mr. Goodman summonsed a group leader who oversaw daily administration and operation of the court offices, who was to bring with her the entire files and all correspondence relating to the three actions. The panel granted the motion to quash this summons, reasoning that Mr. Goodman did not link the witness’ potential testimony about the court’s general practices, procedures and forms to any issue in the Law Society’s case, nor did he show in what way three entire court files were relevant or necessary to an issue in the application. In any event, the panel pointed out that, as a party to the actions, he had access to the court documents, which were public documents. Mr. Goodman’s summons sought to turn this involuntary witness into an expert witness, when he had chosen not to call his own expert. The panel decided that attempting to do so, through a late-in-the-day summons, was an abuse of process.
- 30/05/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
No new notices were posted this week.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Frederick Barry Goodman, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on June 1, 2020 at 10:45 a.m. and from June 2-4, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
David Simoes Malgueiro Campos, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be held on June 3, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Shayle Frederick Rothman, Lawyer (Toronto)
Further to its order of July 25, 2019, the panel orders that the Law Society will pay $46,000 in costs to Mr. Rothman.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Adam Christopher White, Lawyer (Keswick)
The Law Society had applied for a determination of whether Mr. White was incapacitated, and it had established that there were grounds to order a medical examination. The Law Society was present on the date scheduled to hear recommendations from the parties as to the details of the examination but Mr. White was not present, despite having received notice of the proceedings. In the absence of submissions from Mr. White, the panel granted an order in respect of the motion for assessment as sought by the Law Society, with some changes, stating that Mr. White was to be examined by one of two specified physicians in accordance with the conditions set out in the order.
Derek Francesco Sorrenti, Lawyer (Vaughan)
The panel decided that amendments to the rules that came into effect in January 2020 did not change the approach to disclosure in an interlocutory motion. It ruled that the Law Society is obliged to make disclosure in accordance with the principles in Cengarle, and that this motion for production was dismissed because the document sought was solicitor-client privileged.
- 23/05/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Benjamin Odinaka Chukwu Mbaegbu, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 13, 2020.
Barry Stephen Bien, Lawyer (Amherstview)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 15, 2020.
Darcy John Daoust, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 15, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Omar Shabbir Khan, Lawyer (Hamilton)
An appeal hearing will be held on May 28 and 29, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Bradley Ian Dinning, Paralegal (Chatham)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 29, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Adam Barry Sheps, Lawyer (Thornhill)
Mr. Sheps has been and continues to be incapacitated. His licence is suspended immediately and continuing until he is able to prove that he is capable of meeting his obligations as a lawyer
Joseph Benoit Eugene Pierre Gauthier, Avocat (Hawkesbury)
Me Gauthier s’est conduit d’une façon qui constitue un manquement professionnel en omettant de répondre sans délai et de manière complète à des communications du Barreau. Il est suspendu pour quatre mois, et la suspension se poursuivra indéfiniment jusqu’à ce qu’il ait fourni une réponse complète. Il doit verser au Barreau une amende de 5 500 $ et des dépens de 7 500$, ainsi qu’une autre amende de 2 000$ s’il ne fournit pas de réponse complète au plus tard le 15 septembre 2020.
Franklyn Scott Taylor, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Taylor engaged in professional misconduct by failing to comply with an October 2, 2018 order of the Tribunal requiring him to participate in a practice review and by failing to co-operate with and respond to a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended for four months starting June 10, 2020 and he is ordered to pay $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Christian Chukwuedoze Chijindu, Lawyer (North York)
The panel found, in earlier reasons, that Mr. Chijindu had engaged in serious professional misconduct that brought discredit upon the profession, that he acted without integrity and without respect for the administration of justice. The panel found that his actions were not out of character. Given the dishonest nature and lengthy duration of his misconduct, including ongoing failure to comply with court orders, the panel concluded that only revocation will maintain public confidence in the legal profession. Costs of $40,000 were ordered. The panel reduced the amount sought by the Law Society recognizing that revocation will impact his ability to pay costs and that the case was reasonably straightforward.
Shawn Andrew Gerry Hamilton, Lawyer (North Bay)
A dispute arose as to whether $3,000 of the $11,500 that the client had paid to Mr. Hamilton were a gift or additional retainer funds. Considering the atypical nature of the lawyer/client relationship in this case, the client’s relations with a prior representative, her history of litigation before the Landlord and Tenant Board, and the corroboration of Mr. Hamilton’s evidence by his assistant, the panel accepted his’s version of events. The panel found that the disputed payments were a gift and that there was no misappropriation. As a result of this dispute, the client brought a small claims court action against Mr. Hamilton. LawPRO counsel negotiated a settlement of this matter, the terms of which included a payment by Mr. Hamilton to the client and a waiver of any current or future discipline complaints by the client against both Mr. Hamilton and LawPRO counsel. Regardless of whether Mr. Hamilton pushed for inclusion of a release, or otherwise pressured the client to accept it as a settlement term, he accepted it as a term of the settlement. That was sufficient to establish professional misconduct. A penalty hearing was to be scheduled.
Robert Joseph Comartin, Lawyer (Tecumseh)
Mr. Comartin had been found to have engaged in professional misconduct while acting as solicitor and executor of an estate, by: dishonestly rendering improper accounts to the estate totalling over $350,000 and then filing misleading materials to the court in his application to pass accounts; misappropriating $2,400 when he charged that amount to the estate for time spent dealing with a Law Society spot audit; and providing incompetent service as an estate solicitor. The panel rejected the Lawyer’s submission that a lengthy suspension with practice restrictions was appropriate, noting that the presumptive penalty of revocation applied to dishonest behaviour even in a licensee’s personal capacity, and finding that there were no exceptional circumstances in this case. As to costs the panel accepted that the Lawyer, aged 65 and no longer able to practise, would have difficulty paying the $66,820 requested by the Law Society. The panel revoked the Lawyer’s licence effective immediately and ordered $40,000 in costs to be paid over five years.
- 15/05/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Payam Javadi, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of motion to vary or cancel an interlocutory order was filed on May 6, 2020.
Claudius Tadeusz Croiset Van Uchelen, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 11, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Franklyn Scott Taylor, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 20, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Payam Javadi, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Javadi’s September 3, 2019’s interlocutory order is cancelled.
Terry Michael Walman, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Walman engaged in professional misconduct by reacting inappropriately to a threatened lawsuit and by using a registered mortgage to try to make a mortgager pay for a mortgage broker’s fee when he should have known that no broker’s fee had been incurred. His licence is suspended for one month and he is ordered to pay $7,500 in costs to the Law Society.
Davidson Usifoh, Paralegal (Toronto)
Mr. Usifoh engaged in conduct unbecoming a licensee in that he was found guilty of several fraud-related criminal offences. His licence is revoked and he is ordered to pay $2,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Trinity Chanel Aleong Magee, Paralegal (Etobicoke)
Ms. Aleong Magee engaged in professional misconduct by commissioning affidavits in the absence of the affiants, failing to perform services taken on a client’s behalf to the standard of a competent paralegal, failing to report to the Law Society that she was charged with indictable offences, failing to cooperate with and respond to a Law Society investigation, failing to complete and file a report with the Law Society and failing to respond to communications from the Law Society. Her licence is revoked and she is ordered to pay $12,700 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
There were no new reasons posted this week.
- 08/05/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
David Simoes Malgueiro Campos, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on May 6, 2020.
Sang-Kyun Suh, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 6, 2020.
Francois David Lesieur, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding capacity was filed on May 5, 2020.
.
Peter Robert Nicholas Harrison, Lawyer (Meaford)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 4, 2020.
Marie-Jose Beauplan-Mann, Lawyer (Dundalk)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on May 1, 2020.
Bogdan Antoni Kaminski, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 30, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Adam Barry Sheps, Lawyer (Thornhill)
A capacity hearing will be held on May 14, 2020 at 1:00 p.m. by videoconference.
Joseph Benoit Eugene Pierre Gauthier, avocat (Hawkesbury)
Une audience de conduite est prévue pour le 15 mai 2020 à 9:30 h par vidéoconférence.
Suzanne Bernadette Quinn, Lawyer (Toronto)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 15, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
Frederick Goodman, Paralegal (Toronto)
A motion within a conduct hearing will be held on May 12, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Trinity Chanel Aleong Magee, Paralegal (Etobicoke)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 12, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Tang Trang Nguyen, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Nguyen’s appeal from an order revoking his licence is dismissed. Costs may be addressed in writing.
Robert Arthur Otto, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Mr. Otto engaged in professional misconduct by failing to produce information and documents requested in a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended for two months, continuing indefinitely until he has cooperated with the investigation, and he is ordered to pay $3,155.50 in costs to the Law Society.
Adam Christopher White, Lawyer (Keswick)
Mr. White engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond to a Law Society investigation. A reprimand is ordered, as well as $7,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Priashna Singh, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Ms. Singh engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond to a Law Society investigation. Her licence is suspended for one month, and she is ordered to pay $2,401 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Tang Trang Nguyen, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Nguyen appealed a 2018 decision of the hearing panel finding that he knowingly participated in nine fraudulent mortgage transactions, which resulted in the revocation of his licence to practise. This was the second hearing of the allegations; the first, in 2013, had resulted in a reprimand following a finding that Mr. Nguyen’s misconduct was limited to failing to disclose material facts to lender clients in two transactions, but on appeal by the Law Society a new hearing was ordered by the Appeal Division in a decision that was affirmed by the Divisional Court in 2015.
Mr. Nguyen’s principal ground of appeal was that the hearing panel erred in conducting an entirely new hearing and in failing to consider the agreed statement of facts filed at the first hearing, as well as the credibility findings made by first hearing panel. The appeal panel rejected this argument, holding that an order for a re-hearing is a new hearing in which none of the parties, including the panel, is bound by any evidence, arguments or findings related to the original hearing; the new panel was required to make its own findings from the evidence before it. This was not a situation where, as the Court of Appeal ruled in the Steven Nguyen (unrelated) case, a new hearing was not required despite errors having been made by the hearing panel; here, the Divisional Court affirmed the order for a new hearing, and the Court of Appeal denied Mr. Nguyen’s motion for an extension of time to seek leave to appeal that decision. The appeal panel also rejected Mr. Nguyen’s arguments that the second hearing panel applied the wrong legal tests and made unreasonable findings/conclusions with respect to credibility, penalty and costs, and so dismissed the appeal.
Svetlana Shpigelman, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Shpigelman was found to have engaged in professional misconduct arising out of three investigations, based on an agreed statement of facts; she was found to have failed to serve clients, to have misled clients, to have failed to fulfill an undertaking, to have failed to respond to communications from another solicitor, to have mishandled trust funds by failing to maintain sufficient balances in her trust account to meet all of her obligations, to have failed to maintain the proper books and records of her law practice, to have failed to co-operate with the three Law Society investigations, and to have misled the Law Society. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission and imposed a four-month suspension of Ms. Shpigelman’s licence, which was to continue indefinitely until she had satisfactorily provided a complete response to the requests made by the Law Society investigator.
- 01/05/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Jamie John Patrick Thompson, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on April 30, 2020.
Fernand Abdul Majid, Lawyer (Burlington)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 30, 2020.
Benito Antonio Zappia, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 29, 2020.
Andrew Robert Kerr, Lawyer (Barrie)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 27, 2020.
Richard Boraks, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 24, 2020.
Neil Lawrence Boyko, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 24, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Adam Christopher White, Lawyer (Keswick)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 4, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Francis John Chung, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 7, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Terry Michael Walman, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on May 8, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
There were no new orders posted this week.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Todd Elliott Speck, Lawyer Applicant (London)
Mr. Speck sought various documents alleged to be in possession of the Law Society. He argued that the documents would assist in proving misconduct on the part of Law Society officials. The panel found that the allegations of abuse of process were untenable. It further found that Mr. Speck’s good character application had been delayed for reasons that were largely his own doing, and that there was no basis to conclude that the documents sought were relevant to any live issue in the proceeding, and so it dismissed the motion for production
Pieter Carel Verbeek, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Verbeek entered an agreed statement of facts and admitted that he engaged in professional misconduct by bringing an action in Small Claims Court against a complainant, after his complaint had been investigated and closed, and seeking compensation for time spent responding to the complaint as well as damages for loss of reputation, defamation and injurious falsehood. The action was ultimately dismissed for delay and Mr. Verbeek wrote a letter of apology to the complainant which included a cheque to cover some of the legal costs incurred by the complainant in defending the action. The panel accepted the joint submission for reprimand.
Gilbert Ngiem Wansome, avocat (Ottawa)
Au moins dans un premier temps, la partie qui cherche une mesure d’adaptation n’est pas tenue de divulguer la nature précise du problème de santé allégué. La principale exigence est de fournir des preuves acceptables, apportées par un prestataire de soins de santé compétent, des limitations fonctionnelles, de sorte que le Barreau puisse évaluer quelles mesures d’adaptation seraient possibles et suffisantes dans les circonstances. Si les renseignements fournis par le titulaire de permis s’avèrent insuffisants, peu fiables ou contradictoires, le Barreau est alors en droit d’exiger la divulgation d’un diagnostic afin de remplir son obligation en matière d’adaptation. En l’espèce, plus de 14 mois se sont écoulés entre les premières demandes de renseignements du Barreau et la date de l’audience, et les demandes d’adaptation de M. Wansome couvrent au maximum que deux de ces mois. M. Wansome s’est conduit d’une façon qui constitue un manquement professionnel en omettant de répondre sans délai et sans rien omettre aux demandes de renseignements du Barreau. Une audience sur la sanction sera ultérieurement fixée.
- 24/04/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Suzanne Bernadette Quinn, Lawyer (Woodbridge)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 22, 2020.
Dean Randall Adema, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 22, 2020.
Scott Andrew McEachern, Paralegal (Oshawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 21, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Robert Arthur Otto, Lawyer (Hamilton)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 1, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference.
Priashna Singh, Lawyer (Brampton)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on May 1, 2020 at 1:00 p.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Benito Bennardo, Paralegal (Toronto)
On consent, the Law Society’s application for an interlocutory suspension order is dismissed.
Khalid Aziz Sheikh, Lawyer (Brampton)
Mr. Sheikh engaged in professional misconduct by failing to account for fees, charging unfair fees, failing to serve his client, acting in a conflict of interest, two instances of failing to act with integrity, using a dormant trust account for purposes unrelated to the provision of legal services, and engaging in sharp practice. His licence is suspended for two months, starting on May 10, 2020. He is also ordered to submit a variety of his own HST documents to Regulatory Compliance, reimburse his client $4,282.83, and pay $9,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Robert Joseph Comartin, Lawyer (Tecumseh)
Mr. Comartin engaged in professional misconduct in a variety of ways including by misappropriating funds, failing to be honest and candid with the Court, and allowing his standards to fall below those of a reasonably competent lawyer, among other things. His licence is revoked, and he is ordered to pay $40,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Benito Bennardo, Paralegal (Toronto)
The Law Society brought a motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction based on criminal charges that were laid against the Mr. Bennardo. The Crown withdrew the charges and the Law Society consented to the order dismissing the motion, and so the panel dismissed the motion.
- 17/04/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Andrew Robert Kerr, Lawyer (Barrie)
A notice of appeal by the licensee was filed on April 16, 2020.
Brian Curtis Smith, Paralegal (Kitchener)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 14, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Davidson Usifoh, Paralegal (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 22, 2020 at 1:00 p.m. by teleconference.
Gerald Nsamba, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held on April 22, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
There were no new orders posted this week.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The Law Society brought a motion to dismiss Mr. Isaac’s appeal due to delay. Previously, on motions for dismissal for delay, the Tribunal applied the test in Barna, 2005 ONLSAP 3. In this motion, the Law Society relied on the test for extending the time for perfecting an appeal, as set out by the Ontario Court of Appeal in Monteith, 2010 ONCA 78. The two tests are similar, but not identical. The panel decided that it is in the interests of justice that the Tribunal have a consistent approach to these kinds of cases. It found that the Monteith test has the virtue of simplicity and accommodates the concerns addressed in Barna, and so, in future, the Monteith test will be applied both on motions to set aside a deemed abandonment of an appeal and on motions for the dismissal of an appeal for delay. The panel granted the Law Society’s motion and Mr. Isaac’s appeal was dismissed for delay.
Brandon Keven Rooney, Lawyer (Toronto)
An earlier panel denied the Law Society’s motion for an interlocutory suspension, instead imposing practise restrictions. Since that order, Mr. Rooney pled guilty to criminal charges including possession and making of child pornography and counselling to commit an indictable offence. The Law Society argued this constitutes fresh evidence and a material change in circumstances necessitating an interlocutory suspension. Mr. Rooney consented to the suspension. The earlier panel had determined that restrictions on Mr. Rooney’s licence were appropriate and necessary to address the risk to the public and public confidence in the administration of justice, but this panel found that Mr. Rooney’s conviction and incarceration drastically increased this risk, and so suspended his licence on an interlocutory basis.
Remy G. Boghossian, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Boghossian admitted that he engaged in professional misconduct by committing a significant fraud of almost $2 million. He engaged in further misconduct by being in possession of gold bullion that was the fruit of his fraud. Using his status as a lawyer and his trust account in the commission of the fraud was an aggravating factor in his misconduct. The panel found that Mr. Boghossian’s conduct struck at the very heart of the public’s faith in the honesty of lawyers, and it undermined public confidence in the integrity of the profession. It decided that revocation was the only appropriate penalty in these circumstances.
Michael Andrew Weinczok, Lawyer (Vancouver)
Mr. Weinczok was alleged to have failed to respond promptly and completely to requests for information in relation to his failure, in his capacity as estate executor and after more than a decade, to complete the distribution of his uncle’s estate. Over a period of 17 months the Law Society sent 10 letters repeating the same requests for detailed and complete information. Mr. Weinczok had responded based on the financial records in his possession and was awaiting further documentation from the bank, which had advised that the records were available and would be provided. The Law Society, though conceding that Mr. Weinczok had made good faith efforts to obtain the missing records and could not, in their absence, respond fully with the detail it had requested, asserted that Mr. Weinczok should have provided partial responses that could later be supplemented. The panel found that Mr. Weinczok acted in good faith, and reasonably, in circumstances where the Law Society knew that he could not proceed further without the missing records, which all parties believed would be forthcoming; it reasoned that if the Law Society had wanted partial responses pending the receipt of new information it should have asked for them rather than simply repeating the same request for full and detailed responses which it knew could not be provided. The panel also rejected the Law Society’s assertion that Mr. Weinczok waited too long in providing copies of the documents that were in his possession, noting that it knew of their existence and did not request them. Therefore, the panel dismissed the Law Society’s application.
Sean Bissoon, Lawyer (Oakville)
Mr. Bissoon, having received a number of recommendations following a spot audit, did not bring his books and records into compliance with the by-laws until shortly before the hearing of the conduct application. The panel accepted the joint submission of a reprimand.
Carole Catherine Sayers, Paralegal (Keswick)
Ms. Sayers failed to respond to Law Society requests for information regarding a complaint until shortly before the hearing of the conduct application. The panel decided to fine her $1,000 with one year to pay, given her financial circumstances.
- 09/04/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Claudio Martini, Lawyer (Windsor)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 3, 2020.
Robert Joseph Gencarelli, Lawyer (Frontenac County)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 2, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Khalid Aziz Sheikh, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 17, 2020 at 1:30 p.m. by videoconference.
Adam Christopher White, Lawyer (Keswick)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on April 17, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. by videoconference.
Robert Joseph Comartin, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on April 16, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. by teleconference.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Michael Andrew Weinczok, Lawyer (Vancouver)
The Law Society’s allegations against Mr. Weinczok were not established, and so the application is dismissed. Costs submissions may be made in writing.
David Grant Isaac, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Isaac’s appeal is dismissed for delay. Costs submissions are to be made in writing.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Leon Wickham, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Wickham admitted that he did not reply promptly and completely to the Law Society’s communications. Mr. Wickham, who was called to the bar in 1987, had been disbarred in 1994, when he was found to be ungovernable. Seven of the 17 particulars of misconduct established in that matter involved a failure to respond to communications from the Law Society. The remaining particulars included: failing to comply with other regulatory duties, failing to serve clients, and failing to account for funds. Mr. Wickham was readmitted in 2008 and had practised for roughly 12 years without any discipline. He submitted that the appropriate penalty would be a reprimand and/or fine, but, considering his discipline history, the panel decided on the penalty proposed by the Law Society and suspended him for one month.
Jamie John Patrick Thompson, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Thompson admitted that, in his capacity as escrow agent, he released $500,000 in contravention of the terms of the escrow agreement, but asserted that he held an honest belief that the release was authorized. The panel rejected Mr. Thompson’s testimony as being inconsistent with the circumstances, including his admitted understanding of the clear terms of the agreement. It found Mr. Thompson to have engaged in misappropriation with respect to the escrow funds, as well as other funds held in his mixed trust account which were withdrawn on behalf of clients for which he was not holding sufficient funds in trust. The panel also found him to have misrepresented to the escrow client how much money he was holding on its behalf. A penalty hearing is to be scheduled.
Kwok Keung Ngan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Ngan entered an agreed statement of facts and admitted that he engaged in professional misconduct by failing to account promptly for client property at the conclusion of the retainer, and by failing to withdraw funds belonging to him for fees and disbursements from trust as soon as was practical. By the time of the hearing Mr. Ngan had eliminated most of the 1,210 inactive client trust ledgers totalling almost $1.5 million, most of which was for unbilled fees and disbursements. The panel accepted the joint submission of a reprimand with monthly practice and reporting requirements as reasonable in the circumstances, reasoning that, although licensee obligations with respect to trust accounts are important in protecting the public, and the problem had apparently been ongoing since 2006, Mr. Ngan had now taken steps to prevent its recurrence and co-operated fully, and had no intent to deprive clients or mislead the Canada Revenue Agency.
Wallace Robert Crowe, Lawyer (Fort Frances)
Based on an agreed statement of facts, the panel found that Mr. Crowe engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming by misappropriating client trust funds, failing to maintain proper books and records, and negotiating cheques knowing there were insufficient funds to cover them. Although the panel was prepared to proceed to the penalty phase of the hearing, Mr. Crowe requested an adjournment as he did not yet have a letter from his psychotherapist, and a witness was unavailable. The panel, while noting that a number of pre-hearing conferences had been held, at which directions and deadlines for the filing of materials had been imposed, also observed that the evidence was unavailable through no fault of Mr. Crowe, and could be important in determining whether the penalty would be revocation of licence or, conversely, permission to surrender. The panel granted the adjournment, with deadlines for the filing of materials.
- 03/04/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Sandy Alexander Zaitzeff, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on April 1, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
There are no hearings scheduled for next week.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Valérie Thérèse Beauchamp, parajuriste demandeur de permis (Toronto)
La formation a considéré que Mme Beauchamp n’était pas de bonnes mœurs et a rejeté la requête de délivrance d’un permis de parajuriste présentée par cette dernière.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Syeda Sarwat Sohail, Lawyer Applicant (Brampton)
Ms. Sohail, who had been the subject of three complaints while serving as a judge in Pakistan, failed to disclose her discipline history in her application for licensing to the LSO, and later filed amended materials disclosing the complaints in a way that misrepresented their outcomes. A majority of the panel found that her explanations were not credible and that the omission and subsequent misrepresentation had been deliberate and intended to mislead. As a finding of deliberate misrepresentation in the application process precludes a finding of good character, the panel decided to dismiss the application without the need to address the many other misrepresentations alleged by the LSO in the course of the application process both in Ontario and in Manitoba.
The dissenting member of the panel would have allowed the application with conditions that in the first two years the applicant practise as an employee or under an approved plan of supervision and complete three additional hours of CPD in each year. The dissenting member found that the omission and misrepresentation were not intended to mislead but made out of carelessness during a time of great stress adjusting to life in a new country and with limitations in the English language. The dissenting member also considered the other alleged misrepresentations made in the course of the application processes in both Ontario and Manitoba and found that, while Ms. Sohail had made some false statements, they were owing to an uncharacteristic lapse in judgment for which she was remorseful, that she demonstrated integrity and moral strength during her 14 years as a judge in Pakistan under very difficult circumstances, and she had rehabilitated herself in the three to five years since the false statements were made, such that she was presently of good character.
Alisa Anne Burke, Paralegal (Innisfil)
Ms. Burke entered an agreed statement of facts and acknowledged that she had engaged in 19 particulars of professional misconduct as alleged, in relation to eight clients, over two years, by: depositing trust funds into a general account; failing to account for funds received from all eight clients; failing to serve five clients; withdrawing trust funds without delivering an account to three clients; failing to return one client’s documents; and failing to provide a prompt and complete response to the Law Society with respect to four client complaints. The panel accepted the parties’ joint proposal for a six-month suspension with various conditions including practice restrictions for the first year and repayment of all client funds, finding that the misconduct was serious, but there were “significant extenuating circumstances” that created “enormous stress” for Ms. Burke, who demonstrated remorse and rehabilitation and had fully co-operated with the Law Society with regards to the hearing.
Valérie Thérèse Beauchamp, parajuriste demandeur de permis (Toronto)
A 19 ans, Mme Beauchamp a été reconnue coupable d’avoir violé des dispositions du Code de la route LRO 1990, chap. H.8 et de ne pas s’être arrêtée à la demande d’un agent de police. Son permis de conduire a été suspendu pendant deux mois et elle a dû payer une amende. En 2011, elle a été déclarée coupable d’ébriété dans les lieux publics, d’entrave à la justice, de résistance à une arrestation et de refus de fournir une preuve d’identité. Elle a signé un engagement à ne pas troubler l’ordre public et à s’abstenir de consommer de l’alcool. En 2015, elle a été accusée de conduite dangereuse d’un véhicule à moteur et d’agression armée, dans un contexte d’une querelle conjugale avec son ex-conjoint. Ces accusations ont été retirées en échange d’un engagement, qui lui imposait, entre autres, de suivre le programme FOCUS ou un programme similaire d’intervention auprès des partenaires violents. En aout 2017, elle a été accusée d’inobservation des conditions de son engagement pour ne pas avoir suivi le programme FOCUS. Ces accusations ont été retirées par la suite quand la requérante a payé une amende et a accepté de participer au programme FOCUS avant la fin du mois d’aout 2018 ; elle a terminé le programme en mai 2018. La formation était particulièrement préoccupée par la violation de l’engament pris par Mme Beauchamp en 2016, ce qui a mené à d’autres accusations en 2017. Selon la formation, Mme Beauchamp semble ne pas comprendre la gravité de la violation de son engagement. Elle n’a clairement pas accepté la responsabilité de ses actes et a délibérément décidé de ne pas respecter les conditions de son engagement.
La formation a alors décidé que Mme Beauchamp n’était pas actuellement de bonnes mœurs et a rejeté sa demande de délivrance d’un permis de parajuriste.
Roland Spiegel, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
The Hearing Division found that Mr. Spiegel had engaged in serious professional misconduct. It had revoked his licence and awarded costs of $175,000 against him. Mr. Spiegel appealed and the Law Society brought a motion to dismiss his appeal due to delay. The Appeal Division found that Mr. Spiegel’s grounds for appeal did not raise any arguable issues indicating that his appeal might succeed. If not for an extension previously granted by the Appeal Division, the appeal already would have been deemed abandoned. Even that extended time period had passed without Mr. Spiegel perfecting his appeal. The appeal panel found that Mr. Spiegel had offered no real explanation for his failure to advance the appeal for more than 14 months. It balanced the serious material effect of the Hearing Division’s order on Mr. Spiegel against its finding that none of the issues in his notice of appeal raised arguable issues, and so dismissed the appeal for delay.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
The Law Society sought $30,000 in costs for successfully responding to Ms. Deokaran’s appeal of a hearing panel decision that she had engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond promptly and completely to Law Society communications with respect to two investigations. The panel rejected her position that no, or substantially less, costs should be awarded, finding that: (i) her meritless claim of ineffective assistance of duty counsel substantially increased the length and complexity of the hearing; (ii) the submission that costs should be reduced because the Law Society was represented by a salaried employee was contrary to Tribunal jurisprudence; (iii) Ms. Deokaran presented no evidence of her inability to pay; and (iv) the $30,000 requested, with five years to pay, had already been reduced by $20,000 from counsel’s docketed time at tariff rates and was reasonable in the circumstances.
- 27/03/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
There were no new regulatory notices filed this week.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Jane Ann Ledwon, Lawyer (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on April 3, 2020 at 10:30 a.m. by teleconference. Dial-in number available upon request.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Syeda Sarwat Sohail, Lawyer Applicant (Brampton)
Ms. Sohail does not meet the good character requirement and so her application for a licence is dismissed.
Roland Spiegel, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
The Law Society’s motion to dismiss the appeal due to delay was granted. Costs submissions may be made in writing.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Further to its order of January 22, 2020, the panel orders that Ms. Deokaran will pay $30,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Brandon Keven Rooney, Lawyer (Toronto)
The interlocutory restrictions previously placed on Mr. Rooney’s licence have been varied to an interlocutory suspension.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Sébastien Gauthier, parajuriste (Ottawa)
- Gauthier a avoué : ne pas avoir respecté son engagement à enregistrer sur le titre une mainlevée de deux hypothèques, dans le cadre d’une transaction immobilière ; avoir ignoré, pendant plus de sept ans, environ 20 communications qu’il avait reçues de l’avocat de l’acheteur dans le cadre de cette transaction ; ne pas avoir répondu à plusieurs communications provenant du Barreau ; et avoir omis de répondre à plusieurs demandes du Barreau ou lui avoir envoyé des déclarations partielles. Par ailleurs, M. Gauthier a agi sans intégrité quand, dans deux déclarations annuelles, il a indiqué que ses livres et registres pour son compte en fiducie étaient à jour et en conformité avec le règlement administratif, ce qui n’était pas vrai. M. Gauthier a également admis qu’il avait fait défaut de tenir ses livres et registres ainsi que d’autres documents en conformité avec les règles applicables. La formation a accepté la proposition conjointe proposée par les parties et a ainsi ordonné une suspension de trois mois, une amende de 5 000 $ ainsi que des dépens d’un montant de 12 500 $.
Andrew Robert Kerr, Lawyer (Barrie)
Mr. Kerr had been found to have failed to respond promptly and completely to requests for information in relation to two separate investigations. He had recently been reinstated following an earlier finding of the same misconduct, for which he had received a one-month suspension. The panel held that Mr. Kerr’s disability that impaired, but did not prevent, his ability to respond to the Law Society communications was a mitigating factor which reduced the penalty from the two-month suspension that would otherwise be imposed for a second finding of misconduct of this nature to a six-week suspension. The panel also ordered $9,000 in costs with two years to pay.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
During his cross-examination by Mr. Barnwell’s counsel, the Law Society’s expert’s testimony revealed that he might have carried out some investigation of the opposing expert, which raised concerns about his impartiality. A telephone conversation between the Law Society’s expert and the Law Society’s counsel, along with a telephone conversation between the Law Society’s expert and a contact at the expert’s former employer, raised a residual concern about whether his evidence continued to meet the required fair, objective, non-partisan standard. The panel concluded that the Law Society’s expert’s evidence, given in-chief and cross-examined upon, was admissible as expert opinion evidence on the nature and characteristics of the transactions specified in the notice of application, but his evidence consisting of commentary on Mr. Barnwell’s expert’s report was inadmissible.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society alleged that Mr. Barnwell carried out transactions that were fraudulent, and that he either knew about it, or he failed to be on guard against becoming a dupe of his client. After his third expert withdrew, Mr. Barnwell asked for an adjournment to locate and brief another expert witness to answer the evidence heard from the Law Society’s expert. Numerous adjournments and accommodations already had been granted. The panel decided that it had gone above and beyond the requirements of fairness to Mr. Barnwell and now had to consider the prejudice to the public interest in having these serious allegations resolved. The adjournment request was denied.
Steven Walter Junger, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society sought an interlocutory suspension of Mr. Junger’s licence, alleging that he had mishandled or misappropriated just under $700,000 of his client’s trust funds. The Law Society had been appointed trustee of Mr. Junger’s practice, which placed his entire legal business under the Law Society’s control and scrutiny. As the trusteeship order provided significant protection to the public, in these unusual circumstances, the panel found that there was no significant risk of harm to members of the public, though it imposed an interlocutory order, as it also found that there was harm to public confidence in the administration of justice. The panel decided that interlocutory restrictions would not be sufficient, considering: the seriousness of the allegations; that there was no doubt that the client’s trust funds had disappeared; and that Mr. Junger’s conduct, if proven, went to the core of his professional integrity. He was therefore suspended on an interlocutory basis.
Christian Chukwuedozie Chijindu, Lawyer (North York)
Mr. Chijindu’s motion for a stay pending appeal of an order revoking his licence to practise law was dismissed. Two of Mr. Chijindu’s grounds of appeal were at least arguable, but the panel found that even if he was successful on those grounds, they did not demonstrate that he had any chance of success in appealing the finding that he had breached court orders, and so would still would face a lengthy suspension at a minimum, which would significantly undercut the argument that he would suffer irreparable harm if a stay was not granted. The panel found that the balance of convenience did not favour the imposition of a stay: there was concern about the risk to the public in allowing Mr. Chijindu to continue practising pending appeal, based on the findings of the hearing panel that his misconduct raised serious concerns about whether he would practise law with integrity. There were also several outstanding investigations involving Mr. Chijindu that involved integrity issues, and moreover, the merits of the appeal were extremely weak.
- 20/03/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Agostino-Austin Persico, Lawyer (Ottawa)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on September 24, 2019.
Codie Robert Mitchell, Lawyer Applicant (Ottawa)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on March 18, 2020.
Nicholas Christopher Marlow Anderson, Lawyer Applicant (Kitchener)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on March 18, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Tribunal hearings have been cancelled until at least April 30, 2020.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Michael Stephen Puskas, Lawyer (Hamilton)
Term 4 of the Tribunal’s previous order regarding Mr. Puskas is varied on the basis of a material change in circumstances.
Charbel Constantine, Lawyer (Toronto)
Further to its order of January 24, 2020, the panel orders that Ms. Constantine will pay $3,8400 in costs to the Law Society.
Andrew Robert Kerr, Lawyer (Barrie)
Mr. Kerr engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond to Law Society communications with respect to two investigations. His licence is suspended for six weeks, and he is ordered to pay $9,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Claude Alain Burdet, Avocat (Ottawa)
Dans un premier cas, M. Burdet a obtenu un jugement de la Cour des petites créances contre la cliente A pour honoraires impayés. Ils ont alors conclu un règlement qui comprenait un engagement de la part de la cliente A à retirer sa plainte déposée auprès du Barreau et son accord pour aider M. Burdet à se défendre contre la plainte si nécessaire. La formation a décidé que proposer ou accepter un tel règlement représente un manquement professionnel et que l’interdiction de telles conditions contractuelles n’enfreint pas la liberté contractuelle de M. Burdet garantie par le paragraphe 2 b) de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés. Dans un deuxième cas, les honoraires que M. Burdet avait facturés au client B ont été réduits au terme d’une audience de liquidation. M. Burdet n’a pas pour autant remboursé le trop payé au client B qui s’est plaint au Barreau. M. Burdet a ensuite intenté des procédures judiciaires à l’encontre du client B, alléguant que celui-ci lui devait de l’argent en rapport avec les honoraires qui avaient été réévalués. Ceci constitue un manquement professionnel de la part de M. Burdet, en ce que les procédures intentées étaient abusives et constituaient des représailles pour la plainte du client B auprès du Barreau. Alors que M. Burdet alléguait que son droit de ne pas être exposé aux risques d’une double incrimination garanti par le paragraphe 11 h) de la Charte, était violé, la formation a décidé que cette section de la Charte, qui ne s’applique qu’aux procédures criminelles, ne s’applique pas à ce type de procédures administratives.
Derek Francesco Sorrenti, Lawyer (Vaughan)
Mr. Sorrenti was granted a six-week adjournment of the Law Society’s motion for an interlocutory order. The Law Society had filed a notice of motion that included more serious allegations against Mr. Sorrenti than it had previously raised in the course of the investigation, including fraud and misappropriation. Ten days before the hearing, the Law Society filed its materials, which included a motion record of over 2,000-pages, at least 1,500 pages of which Mr. Sorrenti’s counsel had never seen. The adjournment was granted on terms that Mr. Sorrenti not engage in the practice of mortgage administration in syndicated mortgage investments (SMI) or act as trustee in respect of SMI. He was not to engage in the practice of law in relation to major development proposals known as SMI. The panel found that Mr. Sorrenti’s alternative offer, of an undertaking not to be involved in SMI administration or act as trustee, was insufficient as it was not broad enough, considering that there were very serious allegations before the Tribunal and Mr. Sorrenti had very recently failed to follow the Law Society’s instructions when he took fees immediately before the trusteeship. The panel also felt that there was benefit to a public action by the Law Society Tribunal at this stage, in particular given the large number of complainants and publicity that surrounded these SMIs.
Charbel Constantine, Lawyer (Toronto)
Following a three-hour contested hearing, Ms. Constantine was found to have engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate in an investigation by the Law Society. Ms. Constantine’s motion to convert the proceedings to an invitation to attend was dismissed. The Law Society sought and was granted costs in the amount of $3,840, which the panel found to be reasonable and fair considering the range of $2,000 – $5,000 for summary hearings in failure to co-operate cases. Ms. Constantine, who did not provide costs submissions, was given five months to pay.
Luigi Savone, Lawyer (Ottawa)
The appeal panel allowed Mr. Savone’s appeal from the second hearing panel’s finding that he had been willfully blind to (equivalent to knowing assistance in) mortgage fraud. The hearing panel had found, in the alternative, that Mr. Savone was a tool or dupe of one of his clients. After receiving written submissions from the parties, the majority of the appeal panel decided that it should substitute the “willfully blind finding” for the “tool or dupe finding”. The appeal panel decided that a third hearing was not required in the public interest, following two lengthy hearings and the passage of 19 years since the impugned mortgage transactions. The appeal panel rejected the first hearing panel’s finding due to the Law Society’s failure to disclose relevant evidence on which it had sought to rely. It rejected the second because part of the Law Society’s evidence was found to be inadmissible and introduced in a procedurally unfair way. The appeal panel found that there was a significant alternative misconduct finding available, which was endorsed by the hearing panel that had considered the evidence at first instance. The dissenting appeal panel member would have ordered a new hearing as Mr. Savone’s interest in finality did not override the public interest in the regulation of the legal professions. The appeal panel requested written submissions on penalty.
- 13/03/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Brandon Keven Rooney, Lawyer (Stratford)
A notice of motion to vary or cancel an interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on March 11, 2020.
Paul Dominic Helsby Burgess, Lawyer (Campbellford)
A notice of application regarding conduct and a notice of application regarding capacity were filed on March 11, 2020.
Sandra Zaher, Lawyer (Windsor)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 12, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
There will be no hearings next week.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Leon Wickham, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. Wickham engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with a Law Society investigation. His licence is suspended for one month, and he is ordered to pay $1,650 in costs to the Law Society.
Pieter Carel Verbeek, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Mr. Verbeek engaged in professional misconduct by, after the Law Society received a complaint about him from a client, commencing a court action against the client in response to the complaint. A reprimand is ordered, along with $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Vanee Harichandran Senthooran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
Ms. Senthooran engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain the proper books and records and mishandling trust funds. Her licence is suspended for one month, and she is ordered to participate in a spot audit. She is also ordered to pay $7,500 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Nader Fathi, Paralegal (Toronto)
The Law Society brought a motion for an interlocutory order either suspending Mr. Fathii’s licence or restricting his practice. He was charged with three counts of uttering a threat to cause death with respect to a former client. The Crown withdrew the charges and Mr. Fathi entered into recognizance with a condition that he was not to communicate with the complainant. The panel rejected the notion that an interlocutory suspension order is required whenever the evidence shows the alleged misconduct tends to undermine the reputation of the profession generally, instead holding that a restriction on Mr. Fathi’s licence, preventing him from taking on any new clients until he had submitted to an interview with the Law Society’s investigator, was sufficient to reduce the risk of significant harm.
Sébastien Gauthier, parajuriste (Ottawa)
M. Gautier n’a pas participé à l’audience sommaire, la procédure s’est alors déroulée en son absence. La formation a conclu en le manquement professionnel pour défaut de coopération dans le cadre des enquêtes du Barreau. Alors que la formation délibérait sur la sanction, le Barreau reçut un certificat médical attestant que M. Gauthier ne pouvait pas voyager à Toronto d’Ottawa. La formation a accédé à la demande du Barreau de prendre une pause dans ses délibérations afin qu’il puisse communiquer avec M. Gauthier. En dépit des nombreuses tentatives de communications du Barreau, M. Gauthier n’a fourni aucune explication quant à sa situation médicale. Même si la formation considérait les actions de ce dernier comme une demande d’ajournement, elle ne disposait pas des informations nécessaires sur la manière qu’elle aurait pu adopter pour accommoder sa situation médicale. La formation a repris ses délibérations sur la sanction. Il semble que M. Gauthier ait quitté la profession. Il est suspendu pour un mois, et cette suspension se poursuivra indéfiniment jusqu’à ce qu’il ait fourni une réponse complète. Il doit immédiatement verser une amende de 2000 $ au Barreau. S’il ne fournit pas une réponse complète aux demandes faites par le Barreau d’ici deux mois, il devra payer au Barreau une amende conditionnelle de 2 000 $.
- 06/03/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Gerald Wayne Anthony Koski, Lawyer (Windsor)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 3, 2020.
Muhammad Aslam Khan, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on March 2, 2020.
Christopher John Di Giacomo, Lawyer (Niagara Falls)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 28, 2020.
Monica Decock, Paralegal (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 27, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Michael Stephen Puskas, Lawyer Applicant (Hamilton)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on March 10, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 2.
Tang Trang Nguyen, Lawyer (Toronto)
An appeal by the licensee will be heard on March 10 & 11, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 4.
Todd Elliott Speck, Lawyer Applicant (London)
A motion within a licensing hearing will be held on March 11, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 3.
Gilbert Ngieme Wansome, avocat (Ottawa)
Une audience sommaire sur la conduite est prévue pour le 12 mars 2020 à 9h à l’hôtel Novotel d’Ottawa.
Wallace Robert Crowe, Lawyer (Fort Frances)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 13, 2020 at 9:30 a.m.. in hearing room 4.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Sébastien Gauthier, parajuriste (Ottawa)
M. Gauthier s’est conduit d’une façon qui constitue un manquement professionnel et est indigne d’un titulaire de permis, en omettant de répondre sans délai de manière complète à des communications du Barreau dans le cadre de deux enquêtes. M. Gauthier est suspendu pour un mois, et cette suspension se poursuivra indéfiniment jusqu’à ce qu’il fournisse une réponse complète. Il doit immédiatement verser une amende de 2000 $ au Barreau. S’il ne fournit pas une réponse complète aux demandes faites par le Barreau d’ici deux mois, il devra payer au Barreau une amende conditionnelle de 2 000 $. Il doit également verser au Barreau des dépens d’un montant de 1 800 $.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Omar Shabbir Khan, Lawyer (Hamilton)
In the context of his appeal against a finding that he engaged in professional misconduct by submitting forged invoices to Legal Aid Ontario and billing for services he had not performed, and the consequent penalty of revocation of licence, Mr. Khan brought motions to: (i) remove counsel for the Law Society due to counsel’s allegedly improper conduct in the Hearing Division proceedings, the fact that counsel and one of the adjudicators that heard the conduct proceeding in the Hearing Division are both members of the Consent and Capacity Board (CCB), and that counsel will be required to give evidence in a Superior Court action brought by Mr. Khan against the Tribunal, the Law Society and various of their agents; (ii) order that his motion material be made permanently not public; and (iii) permanently stay the proceedings based on an infringement of the Human Rights Code. The motions panel dismissed the motion to remove Law Society counsel, finding: the evidence established that counsel and the adjudicator had minimal contact in their roles as members of the CCB; litigants ought not be able to create a basis to disqualify opposing counsel based on their own actions such as commencing litigation; and Mr. Khan did not meet his “high burden” to establish that counsel had engaged in disqualifying conduct in the hearing proceedings. The panel decided that Mr. Khan’s motion materials would be received in public subject to the same redactions that had been made in the hearing proceedings. The panel struck out or dismissed the balance of Mr. Khan’s motion, agreeing with the Law Society that the request for a stay of proceedings ought to be heard as part of the appeal proper.
Robyrt Hawyrden Regan, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society’s CUPE motion was allowed, so that certain court orders were admissible for use in these proceedings against Mr. Regan, meaning that specific findings of fact contained in those decisions were admissible as proof of those facts in these proceedings, and that Mr. Khan was barred from re-litigating those findings of fact. The panel dismissed Mr. Regan’s cross-motion for an order dismissing the Law Society’s motion or, in the alternative, for an order that certain materials in the court proceedings be admitted in these proceedings, reasoning that, if it is determined that he did engage in professional misconduct, he will be free to bring any relevant evidence in mitigation of penalty, during the ensuing penalty phase of the hearing, as long as it does not contradict the specified court findings.
- 28/02/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Thomas William Gordon Pratt, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 24, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Vanee Harichandran Senthooran, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 4, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 3.
Matys Rapoport, Lawyer (Whitby)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 5 & 6, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 4.
Pieter Carel Verbeek, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on March 6, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 2.
Bradley Ian Dinning, Paralegal (Chatham)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on March 6, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 3.
Leon Wickham, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on March 6, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 3.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Svetlana Shpigelman, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Shpigelman engaged in professional misconduct by failing to serve her clients, misleading her clients, failing to fulfill an undertaking, failing to respond to communication from another solicitor, mishandling trust funds, failing to maintain proper books and records, failing to reply promptly and completely to Law Society communications and misleading the Law Society. Her licence is suspended for four months and continuing after that until she has provided a complete response requests made by the Law Society. She is also ordered to pay $3,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Steven Walter Junger, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Junger’s licence is suspended on an interlocutory basis. Costs will be determined by the panel hearing the merits of the case.
Carole Catherine Sayers, Paralegal (Keswick)
Ms. Sayers engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with a Law Society investigation. She is ordered to pay a $1,000 fine and $1,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Sean Bissoon, Lawyer (Oakville)
Mr. Bissoon engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain proper books and records. A reprimand has been ordered, as well as $4,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Derek Francesco Sorrenti, Lawyer (Vaughan)
Mr. Sorrenti’s hearing is adjourned. His licence is restricted on an interim interlocutory basis.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Martin King Ian Rumack, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Rumack entered an agreed statement of facts and acknowledged that he engaged in professional misconduct by: (i) failing to keep accounting records and do monthly reconciliations for bank accounts for which he was estate trustee or held power of attorney, and having a number of stale-dated cheques and inactive trust ledger accounts; (ii) paying himself power of attorney compensation that was unauthorized; and (iii) paying himself estate trustee compensation that was both unauthorized and excessive. The panel accepted the joint submission of a one-month suspension accepted as reasonable, with the requirement of three additional CPD hours in the area of wills and estates.
- 21/02/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Joseph Benoit Eugene Pierre Gauthier, Avocat (Hawkesbury)
Un avis de requête sur la conduite a été déposé le 19 février 2020.
Maria Louisa L. Diaz, Lawyer (Unionville)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 19, 2020.
Christian Chukwuedozie Chijindu, Lawyer (North York)
A notice of appeal by the Licensee was filed on February 18, 2020.
Steven Walter Junger, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of motion for interlocutory suspension or practice restriction was filed on February 18, 2020.
Adam Christopher White, Lawyer (Keswick)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 14, 2020.
Tyler Anthony Jones-Bechard, Lawyer (Windsor)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 13, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Danish Muhammad Munir, Lawyer (Toronto)
A licensing hearing will be held on February 24 to 26, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 3.
Steven Walter Junger, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion for interlocutory suspension or restriction hearing will be held on February 25, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 4.
Svetlana Shpigelman, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 26, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 4.
Christian Chukwuedozie Chijindu, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion hearing will be held on February 26, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 2.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Brian Robert Goldfinger, Lawyer (Toronto)
The Law Society’s appeal was allowed in part. The appeal panel substituted its findings of professional misconduct for the findings of the Hearing Division. There is no order as to costs of the appeal.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
The Society sought an order that the notice of application be deemed served on the Lawyer and an order dispensing with further service on him. The Society began its investigation of the Lawyer in 2012. In 2015, he was sentenced to over 20 years of incarceration in California. Filing of the application was delayed until 2019, while the Lawyer appealed his sentence. The panel found that, as the Lawyer was served in 2019 with the notice of application by an employee of the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department, he had received actual service of the notice of application and he had notice of this proceeding. Therefore, it was unnecessary to deem service of the originating process, based on the Society’s many other varied attempts at service. Recent communications from his California counsel made it clear that the Lawyer was taking a position with respect to this proceeding and might wish to participate. The panel gave the Lawyer the choice to retain a representative to appear on his behalf in Ontario, or to attempt to arrange for his participation remotely from California. The Lawyer was to contact the Society to finalize arrangements for his participation within approximately three months, failing which, mailing documents to his current place of incarceration would constitute sufficient service, without need to provide confirmation of service.
Jacques Yves Wilfrid Joseph Desjardins (Nepean)
The Lawyer admitted to: failing to deposit funds received from clients into trust; failing to account to clients for funds received in trust; failing to provide legal services to the required standard of competence; charging unfair and unreasonable fees for work that was never provided; and acting in a conflict of interests. The panel was concerned that the jointly-submitted penalty was unduly light, but accepted it considering that the misconduct occurred in the context of the Lawyer’s marriage breakdown and while he was caring for a sick parent. He had expressed some insight into his behaviour and had accepted responsibility through his admissions – The Lawyer was suspended for nine months – He also was to pay a $2,000 fine to the Society.
Glenn Patrick Bogue (Toronto)
The panel had found that the Lawyer was incapacitated within the meaning of s. 37(1) of the Law Society Act. The panel now considered the terms of the appropriate order. As the evidence did not support a definitive conclusion that there was no possibility of recovery, termination of the Lawyer’s licence was not appropriate. The panel decided that the Lawyer’s licence was to be suspended immediately, with the suspension to continue indefinitely until certain conditions are met, including psychiatric examination and treatment – If the suspension is terminated, the Lawyer’s practice will be restricted, as specified in the order, including with respect to practising only as an employee, and continuing treatment.
Nahid Rahimi (Thornhill)
The Paralegal entered into an agreed statement of facts and acknowledged that she engaged in professional misconduct by failing to provide documents requested in the course of a Law Society investigation. The Paralegal fully complied by the time of the hearing and had no prior discipline history. Joint submission for a reprimand was accepted as reasonable.
The applicant’s application for an L1 licence was referred for a good character hearing due to his criminal convictions for manslaughter, possession of stolen property and failing to attend court. The applicant presented extensive evidence, including 26 reference letters, many from members of the profession, describing his rehabilitative efforts in the 15 years since being incarcerated and activities since being released from prison in 2009. The panel found that the evidence consistently established that the applicant had taken full responsibility for the poor choices he had made in his late teens, gained deep insight into his conduct and was genuinely remorseful and driven to give back to his community which he did through volunteer work, and wished to continue as a lawyer. The applicant’s rehabilitation had been “immensely successful” and the panel had “no hesitation” in finding that he was presently of good character and thus eligible for an L1 licence upon completion of the licensing requirements.
Elnaz Mazinani (Toronto)
The Law Society brought a motion to have judicial decisions admitted into evidence in the conduct proceeding as proof of the facts that: (i) the Lawyer had breached a court order; and (ii) the Lawyer’s application for judicial review of the breach finding was an attempt to circumvent the rules restricting rights of appeal. The panel held that the finding that the Lawyer had breached a court order had been finally determined in the courts and would apply in the conduct hearing; to permit re-litigation would amount to an abuse of process and violate the principle of issue estoppel. On the other hand the Divisional Court’s comments, made in the context of awarding costs, regarding the Lawyer’s motives in bringing a judicial review application was not binding on the parties as it was not a finding of fact on an issue that had been before the Courts; the Lawyer was entitled to refute it.
Scott Andrew McEachern (Oshawa)
In the course of a conduct application, following the Society’s motion, the panel ordered that the Paralegal cease and desist from publicly broadcasting the content of confidential and privileged settlement discussions; the content of confidential and privileged documents, including disclosure provided by the Society; and unwelcome and demeaning comments regarding Law Society staff, complainants, and witnesses associated with the proceeding. The panel also ordered that, by a set date, the Paralegal remove from Facebook the material he had posted that was identified to be confidential, privileged, unwelcome, demeaning, and uncivil.
Brian Robert Goldfinger (Toronto)
The Society alleged that the Lawyer had improperly marketed his legal services in a number of specified ways; had advertised specialization in the absence of certification from the Society; and had marketed the provision of second opinions. At the hearing, the panel accepted the parties’ agreement on misconduct, based on all of the Society’s allegations, as well as their joint submission that the penalty be a reprimand. However, in its reasons for decision, the hearing panel decided that some of the allegations that were part of the agreement on misconduct had not been made out and it ordered accordingly. The hearing panel dismissed the particulars of misconduct that the Lawyer’s advertising was improper insofar as: 1) he stated that he specialized in personal injury law; and 2) he referred to himself as the lawyer with the “Golden Touch.”
The Society’s appeal was allowed in part. The appeal panel unanimously found the hearing panel erred by dismissing some allegations of misconduct after advising the parties that it was accepting the misconduct as agreed to and after having endorsed the record to that effect. As the Lawyer was not participating in the appeal, the panel also unanimously found that it should substitute its own assessment of the substantive issues, rather than remit the matter to another hearing panel.
However, the panel did not come to unanimous decisions on the substantive issues arising in the appeal: 1) A majority of the panel agreed that the hearing panel erred in dismissing the allegation concerning specialization; therefore, it allowed this part of the appeal. 2) A majority of the panel (comprised of different members of the panel) agreed with the hearing panel’s decision that the Lawyer’s use of the “Golden Touch” slogan, which was a play on words using the Lawyer’s name, was not improper and it thus dismissed this part of the appeal.
- 14/02/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Daniel James William Matson, Lawyer (Thunder Bay)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 13, 2020.
Suzanne Erika Elcock, Lawyer (Ajax)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 13, 2020.
Ronauld Gordon Walton, Lawyer (Toronto)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on February 12, 2020.
Jassiganth Vamadevan, Lawyer Applicant (Mississauga)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on February 7, 2020.
Omar Davendranauth Rambhajan, Lawyer Applicant (Toronto)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on February 5, 2020
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Christopher John Roper, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 20 and 21, 2020 at 9:00 a.m. in hearing room 4.
Derek Francesco Sorrenti, Lawyer (Vaughan)
An interlocutory suspension or restriction motion hearing will be held on February 20, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 3.
Carole Catherine Sayers, Paralegal (Keswick)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on February 21, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 3.
Sean Bissoon, Lawyer (Oakville)
A summary conduct hearing will be held on February 21, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 3.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Christian Chukwuedozie Chijindu, Lawyer (North York)
Mr. Chijindu engaged in professional misconduct by charging fees that were unfair and unreasonable, appropriating funds otherwise than as permitted by the Law Society’s By-Law 9, failing to encourage respect for the administrative of justice by failing to comply with two court orders requiring him to pay his client, and failing to discharge his duties to his clients honourably and with integrity. Mr. Chijindu’s licence is revoked, effective February 26, 2020. He was ordered to pay costs of $40,000 to the Law Society.
Glenn Patrick Bogue, Lawyer (Toronto)
The panel determined that Mr. Bogue is and has been incapable of meeting his obligations as a licensee by reason of physical or mental illness or other infirmity. His licence was suspended as of February 10, 2020 and will continue indefinitely until specific conditions have been met.
Nahid Rahimi, Paralegal (Thornhill)
Ms. Rahimi engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with and respond to a Law Society investigation. Ms. Rahimi shall be reprimanded and pay $2,400 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
William Ndze Fuhgeh, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. Fuhgeh’s summons to compel the Society’s investigations counsel to testify was quashed. The investigations counsel sought costs of $13,000; Mr. Fuhgeh submitted that no costs should be awarded, or at most $1,000. Mr. Fuhgeh received an adverse determination on the motion to quash and it was clear from the panel’s findings that the motion was brought without reasonable cause. Two factors against full reimbursement of costs to the investigations counsel were Mr. Fuhgeh’s limited ability to pay a substantial costs award and proportionality and the reasonable expectations of parties in a motion to quash a summons (though this motion was more factually involved than usual). The panel awarded costs of $5,000 to the investigations counsel.
Maria Frances Marusic, Lawyer (Windsor)
In the context of two conduct applications, the panel heard three motions: (i) Ms. Marusic’s motion to exclude from evidence e-mail correspondence obtained from her computer on the basis of an alleged breach of the s. 8 Charter right against unreasonable search and seizure; (ii) the Law Society’s motion to receive the evidence of a 78-year old witness by video link; and (iii) Ms. Marusic’s motion to remove counsel for the Law Society due to a conflict of interest. The panel found that the Society conducted an unlawful search and seizure of Ms. Marusic’s computer when it failed to limit the search terms to the agreed-upon criteria and viewed e-mails, including personal e-mails, that went beyond the scope of the investigation and thus beyond the authority of s. 49.3 of the Act. The Law Society then used these e-mails to initiate a new investigation. Balancing the competing interests under s. 24(2) of the Charter, the panel excluded the personal e-mails but admitted the work-related e-mails. The panel found this was an appropriate situation to receive evidence by videoconference in that the witness was located in Florida and had various health conditions which made travel difficult; on the request of counsel for both parties, the testimony would be given in an official examiner’s office in Florida with all counsel present, and either be video recorded for later playback at the hearing or linked to the hearing room on a scheduled hearing day. The panel dismissed the motion to remove counsel for the Law Society, noting that it was Ms. Marusic’s choice to call witnesses from the same law firm rather than her former law partner; the motion was brought late in the day and a change of counsel would cause delay and increased expense; the witnesses’ anticipated evidence was uncontentious and unlikely to raise credibility and reliability issues; and steps had been taken by the firm to address any potential conflict.
- 31/01/2020
NOTICES
REGULATORY NOTICES ARE THE FIRST STEP OF A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
Garry Stevens Pierre, Paralegal Applicant (Ottawa)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on January 29, 2020.
Mark Wade Smith, Lawyer (Stittsville)
A notice of application regarding conduct was filed on January 28, 2020.
Jeramy Silverstein, Paralegal Applicant (Mississauga)
A notice of referral for hearing regarding licensing was filed on January 28, 2020.
UPCOMING HEARINGS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL HEARINGS ARE HELD AT 375 UNIVERSITY AVE. SUITE 402, TORONTO. THE LIST BELOW IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Osborne Godfrey Barnwell, Lawyer (Toronto)
A conduct hearing will be held from February 3-7, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 4.
Shayle Frederick Rothman, Lawyer (Vaughan)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 3, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 2.
Jane Ann Ledwon, Lawyer (Toronto)
A reinstatement hearing will be held on February 4, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 3.
Chakka Nola Ida Jean White, Lawyer (Toronto)
A motion within a capacity hearing will be heard on February 5, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 3.
Dora Elia, Paralegal (Innisfil)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 6, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 3.
James Alexander Kay, Lawyer (Mississauga)
A conduct hearing will be held on February 6-7, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. in hearing room 2.
ORDERS
BELOW ARE SUMMARIES OF RECENT TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNIFICANT MATTER SUCH AS THE STATUS OF A LICENSEE OR LICENSEE APPLICANT OR COSTS.
Remy G. Boghossian, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Boghossian engaged in professional misconduct by committing the offences of fraud over $5,000 and possession of property obtained through the commission of an indictable offence. His licence is revoked and he is ordered to pay $2,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Martin King Ian Rumack, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Rumack engaged in professional misconduct by failing to maintain books and records, by paying himself power of attorney compensation without authorization, and by paying himself estate trustee compensation that was excessive and unauthorized. His licence is suspended for one month, starting February 1, 2020, he is ordered to complete a passing of the estate accounts referred to above, and he is ordered to complete three additional hours of professional development. He is also ordered to pay $2,700 in costs to the Law Society.
Charbel Constantine, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Constantine engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with a Law Society investigation. A reprimand is ordered, and costs submissions may be filed within two weeks.
Kwok Keung Ngan, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Ngan engaged in professional misconduct by maintaining many client trust ledgers in his mixed trust account that had been inactive for more than 12 months. A reprimand is ordered, along with a variety of bookkeeping restrictions. He is also ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the Law Society.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Deokaran’s appeal is dismissed. Costs may be addressed by written submission.
Jeffery Michael James Rehner, Lawyer (Chatham)
Mr. Rehner engaged in professional misconduct by failing to serve his client, failing to answer communications with reasonable promptness, failing to be honest and candid with his client, and failing to return his client’s retainer funds. His licence is suspended for two months, starting February 3, 2020, and he is ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the Law Society.
REASONS
WHEN TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATORS DECIDE A CASE OR PART OF A CASE, THEY USUALLY PROVIDE REASONS. ALL TRIBUNAL REASONS ARE POSTED ON THE CANLII WEBSITE.
Gilbert Ngiem Wansome, Avocat (Ottawa)
Wansome a avoué avoir détourné pour sa propre utilisation 72 025,60 $ de son compte de fiducie. Le Barreau a alors déposé un avis de motion pour suspension ou restriction interlocutoire. M. Wansome a indiqué qu’il souffrait depuis plusieurs mois de problèmes graves de santé, a fourni un certificat médical attestant de son incapacité totale pour six semaines et a demandé un ajournement de l’audience jusqu’à son rétablissement. Le Barreau a répondu qu’il consentirait à l’ajournement conditionnellement à ce qu’une suspension interlocutoire intérimaire soit imposée pour la durée de l’ajournement. Le Barreau a demandé à M. Wansome s’il consentirait à cette condition, mais celui-ci n’a pas répondu. M. Wansome ne s’est pas présenté à l’audience, et les efforts entrepris par le personnel du Tribunal pour le rejoindre furent sans succès. L’ajournement a été accordé en raison de la condition médicale de M. Wansome mais avec la condition qu’une suspension interlocutoire intérimaire soit ordonnée.
Joseph Benoit Eugene Pierre Gauthier, avocat (Hawkesbury)
Gauthier n’a fourni ni la copie du dossier client du plaignant demandé par le Barreau, ni la confirmation que le dossier avait été transféré au nouveau représentant. Dans un autre dossier du Barreau, M. Gauthier, qui était assujetti à une suspension administrative, n’a pas soumis un questionnaire sur le changement de catégorie, comme il devait le faire. M. Gauthier était conscient que l’audience se déroulait à la date fixée, mais il ne s’est cependant pas présenté. La formation a donc procédé avec l’audience sommaire en son absence et a constaté que M. Gauthier a commis des manquements professionnels. Tandis que la formation s’était retirée pour prendre une décision sur la sanction, le Barreau a reçu une lettre, signée par le médecin de M. Gauthier, attestant que ce dernier ne pouvait pas voyager à Toronto depuis Ottawa, ou assister à une audience sans risque d’aggraver son rétablissement. La formation a pris une pause dans ses délibérations concernant la sanction afin d’accorder au Barreau l’occasion de communiquer davantage avec M. Gauthier, et pour que les parties puissent prendre une position concernant les prochaines étapes de cette procédure.
Michael Anthony McKee, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. McKee’s request to adjourn the penalty phase of his summary hearing was denied. He wished to obtain a medical report from his psychiatrist to rely on in mitigation of penalty. Mr. McKee had been aware of this hearing for some time but did not request accommodation until two days ago, when he advised that he would be seeking an adjournment to seek a medical report. The panel found that had been no medical evidence and no request for accommodation, despite a specific inquiry made to Mr. McKee by Law Society counsel.
Michael Anthony McKee, Lawyer (Richmond Hill)
Mr. McKee admitted professional misconduct in failing to cooperate with four distinct investigations and by failing to report a potential claim to his insurer. Mr. McKee was suspended for 45 days, to continue indefinitely, until he complied with his regulatory obligations. The presumptive penalty in failure to co-operate matters, where a licensee has not responded before the hearing begins, is a one-month suspension but the panel found that an increased penalty was warranted in this case as Mr. McKee also had failed to report a claim to the insurer.
Ian Neil McLean, Lawyer (Ottawa)
Mr. McLean entered into an agreed statement of facts admitting the allegations, and that they constituted professional misconduct, in that he: (i) failed to serve a client in a construction lien matter by missing the deadline to respond to a request to admit, resulting in summary judgment and costs against the client; (ii) failed to serve the same client in a small claims court matter by failing to attend the trial after an unsuccessful recusal motion, and then reporting to the client that the Court of Appeal denied his appeal when it fact no appeal had been taken because the Court denied leave to appeal; (iii) withdrew $45,725 from trust prior to having done the work for which the retainer had been provided; and (iv) failed to maintain proper books and records of his law practice. Mr. McLean had a prior discipline record for pre-taking trust funds which had resulted in a two-month suspension that had been stayed pending appeal. The panel accepted the parties’ joint submission that Mr. McLean should be permitted to surrender his licence to practise law, which the parties advised was part of a larger agreement that also disposed of the outstanding appeal.
Calin A Lawrynowicz, Lawyer (Campbellville)
Mr. Lawrynowicz was found to have engaged in various forms of professional misconduct in his representation of two clients, one of whom was a vulnerable 82-year-old widow, including by: misappropriating $425,570; encouraging the client to invest in his company without disclosing the conflict of interest; removing funds from trust without delivering an account; overcharging the client by nearly $400,000; and raising unmeritorious arguments in order to obstruct the assessment of his accounts which he delayed for over ten years. The panel revoked Mr. Lawrynowicz’s licence, having found that there was no evidence to mitigate the penalty from the presumptive penalty of revocation in cases involving deliberate dishonesty.
Shiva Zareian Jahromi, Paralegal (Richmond Hill)
The Law Society brought a motion, after the parties had closed their cases, to amend the wording of two particulars in its notice of application. The panel accepted that the amendments sought arose from Mr. Jahromi’s testimony, were minor and would cause no prejudice to Mr. Jahromi, and granted the motion.
Pamela Jean Milne, Paralegal (Ajax)
Ms. Milne provided legal services while suspended. She failed to cooperate with a Law Society investigation. She failed to notify the Law Society of changes to her contact information. The panel ordered Ms. Milne to respond to the Law Society’s investigator and to repay her fees to a client to whom she had provided legal services while suspended; if she did not comply within two months, she was to pay a fine of $2,000. The panel suspended Ms. Milne’s licence immediately, continuing indefinitely until she had complied with these terms and all pre-existing suspensions had ended. She then would be suspended for an additional four months.
Charbel Constantine, Lawyer (Toronto)
Mr. Constantine fulfilled, prior to the hearing, all outstanding requests for information and argued that his delay did not rise to the level of professional misconduct because it was owing to factors beyond his control. The panel held that records misfiled by the storage company, relocating offices and being a busy time of year did not excuse Mr. Constantine’s one-year delay which included five-and-a-half months of complete unresponsiveness. The panel dismissed Mr. Constantine’s motion to convert the proceedings to an invitation to attend, finding that, although Mr. Constantine had taken positive steps to improve organization in his office and had no discipline history, these were not exceptional circumstances that would warrant conversion; the panel imposed the penalty of a reprimand.
Gabriella Varsha Deokaran, Lawyer (Toronto)
Ms. Deokaran appealed a decision of the Hearing Panel finding that she had engaged in professional misconduct by failing to respond promptly and completely to Law Society requests for information, and the resultant one-month suspension. The appeal panel rejected Ms. Deokaran assertions that she had been denied procedural fairness due to the conduct of the parties at the hearing, holding that: (i) Law Society counsel had not violated the rule in Browne v. Dunn or its disclosure obligations, nor had it improperly relied on Ms. Deokaran’s prior administrative suspension; (ii) the adjudicator did not misapply the test for failing to respond and had no obligation to assist Ms. Deokaran at the hearing as she was represented by duty counsel; and (iii) Ms. Deokaran’s assertion of having received ineffective assistance from duty counsel was without factual foundation. Therefore, the panel dismissed the appeal.
Visit the Law Society Tribunal website at www.lawsocietytribunal.ca for more information about the Tribunal and for last-minute changes to the upcoming hearing schedule. For any questions, or to obtain copies of other public documents filed with the Tribunal, contact Ivy Johnson – Communications Coordinator, Law Society Tribunal, at 416-947-5248 or ijohnson@lstribunal.ca.