Annamaria Enenajor

The Lawyer unsuccessfully appealed a decision finding professional misconduct and revoking his licence to practise law.

The Law Society sought costs of $6,265 for the appeal.

The Lawyer did not file responding submissions.

The Tribunal found the requested amount was well below the general range for appeals and was appropriate given the unmeritorious issues raised by the Lawyer.

Costs of $6,265 were awarded to the Law Society.

The Law Society appealed a hearing panel decision finding that the applicant did not cheat on her licensing exam and was of good character despite making an inaccurate statement during the investigation.

The Appeal Division allowed the appeal, finding the hearing panel erred in law by misinterpreting section 8(2) of By-Law 4 to require an intent to deceive, failing to consider the circumstantial evidence of cheating as a whole, improperly assessing credibility, and applying an elevated standard of proof.

The Appeal Division substituted its own decision, concluding the applicant knowingly made a false representation in connection with her application and therefore deemed her not to meet the requirements for licensing.

The Law Society brought a conduct application against the respondent lawyer alleging he practised law and held himself out as entitled to practise while suspended, breached a Tribunal order, and failed to co-operate with an investigation.

The hearing proceeded in the lawyer's absence.

The Tribunal found all allegations of professional misconduct established.

The lawyer had provided legal services, including drafting a separation agreement, while subject to two overlapping suspensions.

Applying the Shifman test, the Tribunal found the lawyer to be ungovernable due to his repeated failure to comply with regulatory obligations and orders.

The lawyer's licence was revoked and he was ordered to pay $10,111 in costs.

The appellant lawyer appealed a penalty decision that revoked his licence and ordered him to pay $44,135 in costs after a hearing panel found he had misappropriated trust funds and breached Legal Aid Ontario rules by privately billing a client while on a certificate.

The Law Society Tribunal Appeal Division dismissed the appeal, finding no error in principle in the hearing panel's application of the presumptive penalty of revocation for misappropriation.

The panel also found no procedural unfairness and upheld the costs order.

The appellant lawyer appealed a hearing panel decision revoking his licence to practise law for professional misconduct.

He brought a motion to adduce fresh evidence, which was quashed for failure to file a factum, though the panel noted the evidence was already in the record.

The appellant argued that his consent to an agreed statement of facts was invalid because LSO discipline counsel allegedly suppressed evidence and misrepresented facts.

The Appeal Division dismissed the appeal, finding that the evidence in question had been fully disclosed to the appellant's counsel well before the hearing, and that the allegations of prosecutorial misconduct and evidence tampering were entirely unfounded.