LAW SOCIETY TRIBUNAL
APPEAL DIVISION
Date: June 2, 2026
Tribunal File No.: 25A-011
BETWEEN:
Cyriacus Obi Agbarakwe
Appellant
- and -
Law Society of Ontario
Respondent in appeal
Before: Pam Hrick (chair), Teresa Donnelly, Karen Hulan, Geneviève Painchaud, Natalia Rodriguez
Heard: By written submissions
Appearances:
Appellant, self-represented
Kristina MacDonald, for the respondent in appeal
Summary:
AGBARAKWE – Costs – Appeal – After dismissing the Lawyer’s appeal, the panel considered the issue of costs – The appeal was heard in writing, though this process was opposed by the Law Society – Proceeding in writing was effective and efficient – Though serious, it was not complex – The panel ordered $2,200 in costs payable to the Law Society, reduced from $2,500.
REASONS FOR DECISION ON COSTS
1Pam Hrick (for the panel):– In Agbarakwe v Law Society of Ontario, 2026 ONLSTA 7, we dismissed Dr. Cyriacus Obi Agbarawke’s appeal from a hearing panel’s decision retroactively revoking his licence to practise law because he deliberately made false or misleading representations in answering good character questions on his lawyer licensing application. These misrepresentations were only discovered after the Law Society granted him a licence.
2The Law Society seeks a costs award of $2,500 for the appeal. Dr. Agbarakwe asks that no costs, or a substantially reduced amount, be ordered.
3For the reasons below, we order Dr. Agbarakwe to pay costs to the Law Society in the amount of $2,200.
PARTIES’ SUBMISSIONS
4The Law Society points to the general proposition that the legal professions as a whole should not bear the costs of prosecuting licensee misconduct, where the misconduct is ultimately proven: Law Society of Upper Canada v Baker, 2006 ONLSHP 21 at para 7. We note parenthetically that this is not a conduct application and that costs principles in licensing applications and conduct applications are not necessarily the same.
5The Law Society cites Law Society of Ontario v Kamal, 2019 ONLSTA 20 at para 49 for several factors that the Law Society says are relevant for us to consider in determining the appropriate costs award:
Merit of the appeal: The Law Society was successful on the appeal.
Importance of the issues: The Tribunal found that Dr. Agbarakwe deliberately made false statements in his licensing application, which is a serious issue.
Reasonable expectations of the parties: The costs requested fall well below the usual general range of costs on appeal, which the Tribunal has found to be $15,000-30,000: Law Society of Ontario v Wilkins, 2021 ONLSTA 20 at para 8. The costs requested here are therefore fair and reasonable.
6Although the Law Society’s bill of costs shows that it incurred total costs of $2,925 on the appeal for 19.5 hours of work done by a senior discipline paralegal, it only claims costs of $2,500.
7Dr. Agbarakwe notes that the appeal was heard entirely in writing, at his request and at the Tribunal’s direction. This resulted in a much more efficient and less intensive appeal process. He suggests that the hours claimed by the Law Society are disproportionate for a written appeal of modest length, and that the docket entries reflect some duplicated work. Further, he submits that he brought the appeal in good faith and raised legitimate legal questions. He also highlights that he is a self-represented litigant and says that ordering costs would undermine access to justice, imposing a punitive financial burden on him. For these reasons, either no costs or a nominal award of $500 should be ordered.
ANALYSIS
The written hearing
8Dr. Agbarakwe requested a written hearing. His reasons for this included that he was out of the country with limited internet access. The Law Society opposed this request, on the grounds that a written hearing would not account for questions the panel would have, and that Rule 1.1 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure reference the importance of ensuring “processes and proceedings are transparent to the public.”
9In directing that the appeal proceed in writing, the Tribunal noted that there is no loss of transparency in the proceeding, as the written submissions are available to the public. It also noted that the panel could seek further written submissions on a particular issue and/or could direct that an oral hearing be scheduled to receive further submissions, if the panel considered such steps to be warranted.
10It will not be appropriate to hear every appeal in writing. Indeed, outside of requests for costs or certain relief by way of motion, matters decided by the appeal division seem to rarely have been heard in writing.
11Here, we found a written hearing to be an effective and efficient procedure, well-suited to the nature of the issues. The grounds of appeal Dr. Agbarakwe ultimately pursued were discrete. Neither party sought to adduce fresh evidence, nor did they bring any motion for ancillary relief related to the appeal. Materials filed by the parties provided us the information we needed in order to fully consider the positions of the parties. If this had not been the case, we retained the discretion to seek further submissions in writing or to convene an oral hearing.
12We agree with Dr. Agbarakwe’s submission that this procedure created efficiencies that included eliminating preparing for and attending an oral hearing, and focusing the parties on fully setting out their positions in writing. This led to the parties and the Tribunal needing to dedicate less time and fewer resources to the appeal. Most importantly, in doing so, it also preserved a fair appeal process for both parties.
13Where these or similar conditions exist in other appeals, it may be appropriate for the parties and the Tribunal to consider proceeding by way of a written hearing.
Costs analysis
14In determining the appropriate costs award, our first step is to identify the appropriate general costs range: Law Society of Ontario v Barnwell, 2025 ONLSTA 9 at para 10. As noted by the Law Society, the Tribunal has recognized the general range for costs on appeal is $15,000-30,000, though there are exceptions. This range seems to be based exclusively on appeals that included an oral hearing.
15After identifying the general range, we then consider the following relevant factors in order to decide where within this range costs should be ordered, or if a costs award outside this range would be appropriate:
the complexity of the proceeding;
any conduct of the parties during the Tribunal process that lengthened the proceeding;
any financial hardship that affects the licensee’s ability to pay; and
other factors particular to the case.
Barnwell at para 11; Law Society of Ontario v Khan, 2021 ONLSTA 7 at para 9, citing Law Society of Ontario v Perrelli, 2018 ONLSTH 80 at para 48.
16This was not a complex proceeding. It proceeded by way of written submissions. While it dealt with a serious issue related to the licensee’s integrity, the grounds of appeal were relatively straightforward, though unmeritorious.
17As noted above, the Law Society resisted Dr. Agbarakwe’s request for the hearing to proceed in writing. This created an unnecessary step in the process, for which its bill of costs shows the Law Society incurred costs of $300. Dr. Agbarakwe was successful with his request for a written appeal.
18While Dr. Agbarakwe submits it would undermine access to justice to make a costs award against him as a self-represented litigant, he has not provided any evidence of financial hardship.
19Overall, Dr. Agbarakwe ought reasonably to have expected that he would have to pay the Law Society’s costs if he were unsuccessful in his appeal. The costs were dramatically reduced by proceeding with a written hearing, falling well below the range for costs in an appeal. While the costs sought by the Law Society are modest, generally reasonable, and reflect a reduction from its actual costs, our view is that a further reduction of $300 is appropriate in light of its refusal to consent to Dr. Agbarakwe’s request for a written hearing.
20As such, we find that a costs award of $2,200 is appropriate in the circumstances.
ORDER
21For these reasons, we order:
- Dr. Agbarakwe shall pay to the Law Society costs in the amount of $2,200 on or before July 2, 2026. Interest shall accrue on any overdue portion of these costs at a rate of 4% per year.