David LeMesurier

The Law Society of Ontario (LSO) investigated a cheating scandal involving the November 2021 licensing exams.

Based on statistical anomalies, the LSO voided the applicants' exam results and their registration in the licensing process without holding a hearing.

The applicants sought judicial review.

The Divisional Court held that while voiding the compromised exams was a reasonable administrative measure, voiding the applicants' registration and imposing regulatory sanctions without a hearing breached procedural fairness.

The court quashed the punitive sanctions and remitted the matters to the LSO.

The appellant, a lawyer whose licence was suspended for failing to cooperate with a Law Society investigation, sought to appeal and judicially review a decision of the Law Society Tribunal Appeal Division that denied his motion for a stay pending appeal and a permanent stay of proceedings for abuse of process.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, finding that the Appeal Division's decision was interlocutory and not a final decision.

The Court also dismissed the application for judicial review as premature, holding that the appellant must allow the administrative process to run its course and that his allegations of abuse of process did not constitute exceptional circumstances warranting early intervention.

The applicant sought a stay of proceedings before a member of the Law Society Appeal Panel, with the decision reserved.

In this case management teleconference, the application against the Attorney General of Ontario was dismissed on consent.

The application against the Law Society was stayed on consent pending the release of the Appeal Panel member's decision on the stay motion.

The appellant lawyer appealed a decision of the Law Society Tribunal Appeal Division, which upheld a hearing panel's order that she pay $150,000 in costs for a discipline proceeding.

The lawyer had entered into a settlement agreement where the Law Society agreed to forgo costs in exchange for her not contesting deemed admissions of professional misconduct.

However, the lawyer subsequently attempted to rescind the agreement and moved to withdraw her admissions.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the lawyer's actions constituted a repudiation of the settlement agreement, which deprived the Law Society of the substantial benefit of its bargain and relieved it of its obligation to forgo costs.