Dr. Vivian Rakoff

The appellant, a disbarred lawyer, appealed the Law Society's dismissal of his application for readmission.

The Law Society panels had found that the appellant met most criteria for readmission but failed to show he had purged his guilt and was extremely unlikely to re-offend, primarily because he continued to deny that he intentionally misappropriated funds.

The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, holding that the panels erred in law by effectively making an admission of guilt a precondition for reinstatement, contrary to established legal principles.

The Court ordered the appellant's readmission, remitting the matter to a Hearing Panel solely to determine appropriate conditions.

The applicant was injured in a rear-end motor vehicle accident and claimed income replacement benefits (IRBs).

The insurer terminated IRBs, arguing the applicant could return to her pre-accident jobs as a bus driver and special needs rehabilitation specialist.

The arbitrator found that while the applicant had pre-existing psychological issues, the accident materially contributed to a substantial psychological inability that prevented her from performing the physically demanding tasks of her pre-accident jobs.

The applicant was awarded IRBs for the disputed period.

However, the arbitrator rejected the applicant's claim to include income from a photography business in the IRB calculation, finding insufficient evidence that she performed the essential tasks of that business or that she was disabled from doing so.