Timothy Moseley

OCMTCapital Markets TribunalJul 26, 2016

Janet Leiper

OCMT0 cases2009–2019

Alan Lenczner

OCMT0 cases2013–2016

Respondents found to have engaged in unregistered trading, illegal distributions, and fraud against investors.

Staff of the Ontario Securities Commission alleged that the respondents contravened Ontario securities law by engaging in unregistered trading, conducting illegal distributions, making prohibited representations about listing on an exchange, and perpetrating fraud on investors.

The Commission found that Blue Gold Holdings Ltd., Raj Kurichh, and Nigel Greening engaged in the business of trading without registration.

BGH and Kurichh were found to have engaged in illegal distributions and made prohibited representations regarding listing.

Furthermore, BGH and Kurichh were found to have perpetrated fraud by misrepresenting the company's sales pipeline and government approvals, diverting investor funds for personal use, and fraudulently diluting the interests of retail shareholders.

Kurichh and Greening were deemed liable for BGH's breaches as directors and officers who authorized, permitted, or acquiesced in the non-compliance.

A sanctions hearing was ordered.

Staff of the Commission v. Blue Gold Holdings Ltd., 2016 ONSEC 24

Clare Devlin

Christophe Shammas

8 cases2016–2025

Timothy Moseley

OCMTCapital Markets TribunalMay 26, 2016

Reciprocal order granted permanently banning respondent from Ontario capital markets following BCSC fraud findings.

Staff of the Ontario Securities Commission applied for an inter-jurisdictional enforcement order against the respondent under subsection 127(10) of the Securities Act, based on a prior decision of the British Columbia Securities Commission (BCSC).

The BCSC had found that the respondent perpetrated a fraud on an investor and traded without registration, permanently banning him from British Columbia's capital markets.

The Commission found that the BCSC order met the requirements of subsection 127(10) and that it was in the public interest to protect Ontario investors by imposing reciprocal sanctions.

The Commission ordered permanent bans on the respondent trading in securities, acting as a registrant, and serving as a director or officer of any issuer or registrant in Ontario.

Staff of the Ontario Securities Commission v. Noshad Dowlati, 2016 ONSEC 20

Dina Milivojevic

Not Practising Law - Employed7 cases2015–2019

Derek D. Ricci

33 cases2009–2024

Brooke A. Shulman

1 case2016–2016

Timothy Moseley

OCMTCapital Markets TribunalMay 5, 2016

Securities Commission imposes permanent and 10-year market bans following respondent's criminal conviction for investment fraud.

Following his criminal conviction for fraud relating to the Greyhawk Millenium investment fund, Staff of the Ontario Securities Commission sought permanent market bans against the respondent under s. 127(10) of the Securities Act.

The Commission found that the respondent's conviction arose from a course of conduct related to securities, as the investments met the test for an investment contract.

While the respondent's misconduct caused significant losses and involved falsified documents, the Commission noted his full cooperation and genuine remorse as mitigating factors.

The Commission ordered permanent bans on the respondent acting as a registrant, investment fund manager, or promoter, but limited the trading and director/officer bans to 10 years with exceptions allowing him to provide for his family.

Staff of the Commission v. Terrence Bedford, 2016 ONSEC 18

Clare Devlin

Timothy Moseley

OCMTCapital Markets TribunalMay 4, 2016

Reciprocal enforcement order granted imposing trading and registration bans based on a British Columbia Securities Commission order.

Staff of the Ontario Securities Commission sought an inter-jurisdictional enforcement order under s. 127(10) of the Securities Act against the respondent, based on a settlement agreement and order from the British Columbia Securities Commission.

The respondent had admitted to trading in securities without registration and illegally distributing securities in British Columbia.

The respondent did not appear at the hearing.

The Commission found that the statutory test was met and that it was in the public interest to issue a reciprocal order.

The Commission imposed trading and registration bans mirroring the BC order until May 7, 2017.

Robert Laudy Williams, 2016 ONSEC 16

Clare Devlin

Timothy Moseley

OCMTCapital Markets TribunalMay 3, 2016

Permanent market bans ordered against investment advisor convicted of misappropriating nearly $5 million from clients.

Staff of the Ontario Securities Commission sought an order under s. 127(1) of the Securities Act against the respondent, who had previously been convicted of multiple counts of theft by conversion for misappropriating nearly $5 million from his clients.

The Commission found that the respondent's criminal convictions arose from a course of conduct related to securities, as the transactions met the test for an investment contract.

Given the respondent's egregious breach of trust, exploitation of vulnerable clients, and the significant losses caused, the Commission concluded it was in the public interest to permanently remove him from Ontario's capital markets.

The Commission ordered permanent bans on trading, acquiring securities, and acting as a director, officer, or registrant.

Staff of the Commission v. Mark Allen Dennis, 2016 ONSEC 15

Brendan Van Niejenhuis

80 cases2004–2016

Timothy Moseley

OCMTCapital Markets TribunalApr 21, 2016

Deborah Leckman

OCMT0 cases2013–2019

Christopher Portner

OCMT5 cases2011–2024

Permanent market bans imposed following criminal conviction for $50 million Ponzi scheme.

Following his criminal conviction for fraud in relation to a $50 million Ponzi scheme, Staff of the Ontario Securities Commission sought a reciprocal order against the respondent under s. 127(10) of the Securities Act.

The Commission found that the respondent's criminal conviction arose from a course of conduct related to securities, specifically investment contracts.

Given the egregious nature of the fraud, the respondent's lack of remorse, and the need for specific and general deterrence, the Commission concluded that permanent market bans were necessary to protect the public interest.

In the Matter of Weizhen Tang, 2016 ONSEC 13

Michael Denyszyn

5 cases2013–2018

Kevin Richard

52 cases2008–2026

Joseph Groia

85 cases1999–2026

Gavin Smyth

9 cases2006–2019

David Sischy

38 cases2012–2025

Timothy Moseley

OCMTCapital Markets TribunalApr 20, 2016

Grant Vingoe

OCMT0 cases2007–2019

Deborah Leckman

OCMT0 cases2013–2019

Terms and conditions requiring an independent consultant imposed on registered dealers due to chronic compliance failures.

The Applicants, two registered dealers under common ownership, requested a hearing and review of a Director's Decision that imposed terms and conditions on their registrations due to a long history of compliance deficiencies.

The Ontario Securities Commission found that the Applicants had failed to comply with Ontario securities law in numerous respects over a period of years, including inadequate governance, failure to instill a culture of compliance, inadequate compliance resources, and recurring deficiencies.

The Commission confirmed the Director's Decision and ordered that each firm retain an independent consultant to review and improve their compliance systems.

Argosy Securities Inc. et al., 2016 ONSEC 11

Timothy Moseley

OSCOntario Securities CommissionMar 29, 2016

Edward P. Kerwin

OSC0 cases2011–2016

Darren McKall

OSC0 cases2000–2026

Exemptive relief granted to permit top funds to invest in related underlying funds.

Vanguard Investments Canada Inc. applied for exemptive relief on behalf of certain top funds to permit them to invest in underlying funds managed by Vanguard or its affiliates.

The relief sought exemptions from the substantial securityholder and related issuer restrictions in the Securities Act, as well as the consent requirements in NI 31-103.

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the requested relief, subject to conditions including compliance with Part 2 of NI 81-102 and specific disclosure requirements in the offering memoranda.

Vanguard Investments Canada Inc. (Re), 2016 CanLII 15963

Timothy Moseley

OSCOntario Securities CommissionFeb 9, 2016

Janet Leiper

OSC0 cases2009–2019

Exemptive relief granted for Genterra Capital Inc. to cease being a reporting issuer.

Genterra Capital Inc. applied for a decision that it is no longer a reporting issuer in Alberta, Ontario, and Quebec.

Following a plan of arrangement, the Filer became wholly-owned by its control group and its common shares were delisted.

The Filer has fewer than 15 securityholders in each Canadian jurisdiction and fewer than 51 worldwide.

The Ontario Securities Commission, acting as principal regulator, granted the exemptive relief sought.

Genterra Capital Inc. (Re), 2016 CanLII 5782

Clare Devlin

Timothy Moseley

OCMTCapital Markets TribunalFeb 4, 2016

Reciprocal enforcement order granted imposing permanent market bans for securities fraud and illegal distribution.

Staff of the Ontario Securities Commission applied for an inter-jurisdictional enforcement order against the respondents under subsection 127(10) of the Securities Act, based on a prior order of the Alberta Securities Commission (ASC).

The ASC had found that the respondents engaged in fraud, made materially misleading statements, and engaged in an illegal distribution of securities.

The OSC found that the ASC order met the requirements of subsection 127(10) and that it was in the public interest to protect Ontario investors by imposing reciprocal sanctions.

The OSC ordered permanent market bans and director/officer bans against the respondents, mirroring the ASC's sanctions.

Staff of the Commission v. Lawrence Zeiben et al., 2016 ONSEC 5

Clare Devlin

Timothy Moseley

OCMTCapital Markets TribunalJan 25, 2016

Permanent capital markets ban ordered against respondent following criminal convictions for multi-million dollar Ponzi scheme.

Staff of the Ontario Securities Commission applied for an inter-jurisdictional enforcement order under s. 127(1) of the Securities Act, relying on s. 127(10), following the respondent's criminal convictions for fraud over $5,000.

The respondent had participated in a Ponzi scheme that defrauded approximately 160 investors of over $6 million, and separately defrauded his physician of over $1 million.

The Commission found that the fraudulent transactions met the test for 'investment contracts' and therefore constituted a course of conduct related to securities.

Given the severity of the fraud, the devastating impact on investors, and the respondent's motivation of greed, the Commission concluded it was in the public interest to permanently ban the respondent from participating in Ontario's capital markets.

In the Matter of Paul Camillo Dinardo, 2016 ONSEC 1

James Camp

20 cases2007–2023

Christie Johnson

19 cases2011–2018

Timothy Moseley

OCMTCapital Markets TribunalDec 16, 2015

Application to extend temporary cease trade order dismissed; issuer's late filings did not justify continued market exclusion.

Staff of the Ontario Securities Commission sought a third extension of a temporary cease trade order against the Respondents, alleging they engaged in the business of trading in securities without registration and illegally distributed securities.

The Commission found no evidence that the Respondents engaged in the business of trading, as they only issued their own shares.

While the Respondents failed to file reports of exempt distribution on time, they provided satisfactory information explaining the failure and assuring future compliance.

The Commission concluded the risk of future harm to investors was low and dismissed Staff's application to extend the temporary order.

Dennis L. Meharchand et al., 2015 ONSEC 43

Timothy Moseley

OSCOntario Securities CommissionNov 24, 2015

Mary G. Condon

OSC0 cases2009–2016

Exemption granted to allow investment fund manager to sponsor financial planning educational marketing initiatives.

The applicant, an investment fund manager, applied for exemptive relief from subsection 5.1(a) of National Instrument 81-105.

The applicant sought permission to pay participating dealers for direct costs related to cooperative marketing initiatives where the primary purpose is to provide educational information concerning financial planning matters.

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the exemption, subject to conditions ensuring the information is general, educational, and not tied to sales incentives.

Sun Life Global Investments (Canada) Inc. (Re), 2015 CanLII 76904

Timothy Moseley

OSCOntario Securities CommissionNov 18, 2015

Christopher Portner

OSC5 cases2011–2024

Exemptive relief granted to permit investment funds to invest in underlying funds managed by the same manager.

The applicant applied for exemptive relief on behalf of itself and certain investment funds it manages.

The relief sought was an exemption from the restrictions in securities legislation that prohibit an investment fund from knowingly making an investment in an issuer in which the fund is a substantial securityholder, or in which an officer, director, or substantial securityholder of the fund's manager has a significant interest.

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the requested relief, subject to conditions including that the funds are distributed solely on a private placement basis and that appropriate disclosure is provided to investors regarding the fund-on-fund structure and potential conflicts of interest.

Lissom Investment Management Inc. (Re), 2015 CanLII 74882

Timothy Moseley

OSCOntario Securities CommissionNov 17, 2015

Christopher Portner

OSC5 cases2011–2024

Exemption from Take-over Bid Requirements granted for purchasers of investment fund units.

Purpose Investments Inc. applied for an exemption from the Take-over Bid Requirements under Ontario securities legislation for purchasers of Class A or Class T units of the Investment Grade Managed Duration Income Fund.

The Ontario Securities Commission granted the exemption, provided that a purchaser does not beneficially own or control 20% or more of the total outstanding units of all classes as a result of the purchase.

The decision terminates on the Automatic Conversion Date.

Purpose Investments Inc. (Re), 2015 CanLII 75644

Kevin Richard

52 cases2008–2026

Brooke Shulman

4 cases2014–2015

Timothy Moseley

OCMTCapital Markets TribunalNov 12, 2015

Stay of Director's Decision granted pending review, subject to interim terms and conditions on registrations.

The Moving Parties, Argosy Securities Inc. and Keybase Financial Group Inc., sought a stay of a Director's Decision that imposed terms and conditions on their registrations, including the requirement to retain an independent compliance consultant.

The Commission applied the RJR-MacDonald test and found that there was a serious question to be tried, the Moving Parties would suffer irreparable harm from unrecoverable costs if forced to comply immediately, and the balance of convenience favoured granting the stay.

The stay was granted pending a hearing and review, subject to interim terms and conditions restricting the addition of new dealing representatives, the opening of new branches, and leveraged investments.

Argosy Securities Inc. et al., 2015 ONSEC 38

Jeff Galway

11 cases2009–2026

Catherine Weiler

17 cases2009–2018

Timothy Moseley

OCMTCapital Markets TribunalNov 10, 2015

No-contest settlement approved for registrant's inadequate controls resulting in excess fees, following self-reporting.

Staff of the Ontario Securities Commission alleged that the respondent had inadequacies in its systems of controls and supervision, resulting in clients paying excess fees.

The respondent self-reported the issue, cooperated with Staff, and entered into a no-contest settlement agreement.

The Commission approved the settlement, which included a compensation plan, enhanced policies, a voluntary payment of $250,000, and $20,000 for costs, finding it to be in the public interest.

Quadrus Investment Services Ltd., 2015 ONSEC 37

Naila Ruba

3 cases2015–2015

Clare Devlin

Timothy Moseley

OCMTCapital Markets TribunalOct 8, 2015

Inter-jurisdictional enforcement order granted restricting respondent's market participation based on prior BCSC sanctions.

Staff of the Ontario Securities Commission sought an inter-jurisdictional enforcement order against the respondent under s. 127(10) of the Securities Act, based on a prior order of the British Columbia Securities Commission (BCSC).

The BCSC had found that the respondent engaged in illegal distribution, unregistered trading, and made misrepresentations to investors.

The respondent did not appear at the written hearing.

The Commission found that the BCSC order met the test under s. 127(10) and that it was in the public interest to make a reciprocal order in Ontario, noting the respondent's solicitation of potential Ontario investors via Craigslist.

The Commission ordered that the respondent resign any positions as director or officer of any issuer or registrant, and permanently restricted his participation in Ontario's capital markets until the BCSC administrative penalty is paid and the BCSC ban expires.

Daveed Zarr (Asi Lalky), 2015 ONSEC 35

Timothy Moseley