LAW SOCIETY TRIBUNAL

HEARING DIVISION

Date: April 8, 2026

Tribunal File No.: 26H-007

BETWEEN:

Law Society of Ontario

Applicant

• and -

Cosmas Anthony-Adesina

Respondent

Before: Malcolm M. Mercer (Chair)

Heard: March 20, 2026, by videoconference

Appearances:

Apiramy Suntharalingam, for the applicant

Respondent, self-represented

Summary:

ANTHONY-ADESINA – Summary Hearing – Failure to Maintain Books and Records – The Law Society alleged that the Lawyer failed to maintain required books and records of his law practice which the Lawyer did not dispute. The Lawyer was found to have failed to maintain his books and records and was suspended for one month followed by an indefinite suspension pending compliance – The Lawyer was also ordered to pay costs to the Law Society of $3,500.

REASONS FOR DECISION

1Malcolm M. Mercer:– Cosmas Anthony-Adesina is alleged to have failed to maintain the books and records of his law practice, contrary to s 18 of By‑Law 9.

2The evidence establishes that Mr. Anthony-Adesina has not maintained required books and records. Expressing remorse, he does not dispute that this is so.

3Mr. Anthony-Adesina’s position is that he did not intentionally breach his professional obligations. Rather, it appears that he did not take the steps required to know his obligations. His breach of By-Law 9 is professional misconduct.

4Mr. Anthony-Adesina did not bring his required books and records into compliance prior to the hearing of this application. As a result, he continues to be in breach of By-Law 9 and to engage in professional misconduct.

5Recognizing the impact on Mr. Anthony-Adesina, I conclude that it is necessary to order suspensions. An indefinite suspension pending compliance is required to ensure that Mr. Anthony-Adesina brings his books and records into compliance as soon as possible.

6A one-month suspension is required to ensure that Mr. Anthony-Adesina and other licensees take the obligation to maintain required books and records seriously. While it may well be that Mr. Anthony-Adesina has learned this lesson, general deterrence requires this suspension order. Fairness and parity also require that like cases be treated in like manner.

7The Law Society seeks costs of $5,000. I order costs of $3,500.

8My reasons are as follows.

Mr. Anthony-Adesina and his practice

9Mr. Anthony-Adesina came to practise law later in life. He was called to the bar in Alberta in February 2023 and in Ontario in July 2023. He began practising in Ontario in April 2024.

10On November 21, 2025, an investigator attended on Mr. Anthony-Adesina in his office as part of a separate investigation. According to the investigator, Mr. Anthony-Adesina disclosed that:

• he no longer maintains a trust account;
• he obtains up front block fees for client retainers and deposits the funds into his personal account;
• he does not provide invoices to the clients;
• he does not issue receipts to clients; and
• his personal bank statements show that he deposits round dollar lump sum fees and immediately uses the funds, in part, for personal use.

11As a result, on November 21, 2025, a further investigation was instructed into possible:

• misappropriation and/or mishandling and/or misapplication of trust monies or monies imposed with a trust; and
• failure to maintain books and records and other required information in compliance with the By-Laws.

12Mr. Anthony-Adesina was interviewed by the investigator on November 28, 2025. He advised the investigator that:

• to trace the funds that he deposited into his personal account he had to look at his client files to see when they paid;
• he does not maintain a receipts and disbursements journal or any report that outlines the funds deposited into and disbursed from his bank account;
• he does not maintain deposit slips for funds deposited into his bank account;
• he does not provide invoices to the clients;
• he does not issue receipts to clients; and
• he does not have a duplicate cash receipts book.

13The investigator requested information and documents by written requests made on November 28 and December 2, 2025.

14The investigator spoke again with Mr. Anthony-Adesina on March 16, 2026. She explained the applicable requirements in detail and reviewed By-Law 9 with him. She specifically explained what materials remained outstanding and why the documents he had recreated were still not in compliance with the By-Law requirements.

15Mr. Anthony-Adesina provided written representations dated December 19, 2025, with respect to failure to maintain books and records and other required information in which he advised that:

• He understood that a trust account was only required for real estate deals.
• He employed a flat fee system and did not regard his clients’ advance fee payment as a retainer fee that had to be paid into a trust account.
• His clients have not complained and 90% of clients end up owing him money.
• He maintains what he described as “account journals” in his client files as they make their payments.
• This has been “a great learning curve” for him and “It definitely makes one’s life easier and creates accountability to maintain account journals in one spot where one can easily have access to trust receipts, invoices, disbursement and payment history.”
• “Following the instruction of both Karen and Monica at their first visit to my office I have opened a new trust account and have started engaging excel Spreadsheet with a hard book ledger for my account journals. I have also started updating my active files with invoices and receipts. That is a practice that will stay glued to my legal practice henceforth as required by By Law 9 and Karen’s advice.”

16Mr. Anthony-Adesina produced a document entitled “General Account Receipts and Disbursements Journal”. This is not a journal but rather a collection of statements of account.

17In his testimony, Mr. Anthony-Adesina did not dispute that he had failed to comply with By-Law 9. His evidence was that he did not realize that he failed to comply and that he was committed to doing so going forward.

18While Mr. Anthony-Adesina does not dispute his non-compliance, what is required to come into compliance becomes significant. As Mr. Anthony-Adesina has used his personal bank account as a general account for his practice, issues arise with respect to the effect of By-Law 9.

By-Law 9

Money received before services are rendered and disbursements are made

19Section 7(2)(d) of By-Law 9 provides that a licensee receives money in trust for a client if the licensee receives from a person money that is advanced to the licensee on account of fees for services not yet rendered. Section 7(2)(e) provides the same with respect to disbursements not yet made.

20Advance block fees and monetary retainers received at the outset of a matter must be paid into a trust account because payments are on account of fees for services not yet rendered and disbursements not yet made.

21In respect of fees for services, s 9(1)(3) of By-Law 9 provides that licensees may only withdraw “[m]oney properly required for or toward payment of fees for services performed by the licensee for which a billing has been delivered”.

22Licensees can only pay themselves from trust for services that have been performed and for which a billing has been delivered.

23Taking block fees from clients and putting those fees into a personal account without having done the work and without having rendered an invoice is non- compliant with By-Law 9.

Required financial records

The requirements of ss 18 and 19 of By-Law 9 in the ordinary context

24Section 18 generally requires “financial records to record all money and other property received and disbursed in connection with the licensee’s professional business”. Section 18 also requires specific records, including the following:

• a trust receipts journal – s 18(1);
• a trust disbursements journal – s 18(2);
• a clients’ trust ledger – s 18(3);
• a trust transfer journal – s 18(4);
• a receipts journal for non-trust receipts – s 18(5);
• a disbursements journal for non-trust disbursements – s 18(6);
• a fees book or a chronological file of copies of billings – s 18(7);
• monthly records of trust reconciliations – s 18(8);
• a record of property, other than money, held in trust – s 18(9);
• bank statements or pass books, images of cleared cheques and detailed duplicate deposit slips for all trust and general accounts – s 18(10);
• signed requisitions and signed printed confirmations of electronic transfers of trust money – s 18(11); and
• signed authorizations of withdrawals by Teranet and signed paper copies of confirmations of withdrawals by Teranet – s 18(12).

25Section 19 establishes further record keeping requirements if cash is received. This includes a book of duplicate receipts which identifies:

• the date on which cash is received,
• the person from whom cash is received,
• the amount of cash received, and
• the client for whom cash is received and any file number in respect of which cash is received;

and which contains the signature of (i) the licensee or the person authorized by the licensee to receive cash and (ii) of the person from whom cash is received.

The requirements of ss 18 and 19 where a general account is used for personal transactions

26Mr. Anthony-Adesina used his personal bank account as the general account for his professional business. This meant that there were personal transactions and professional business transactions in the same bank account.

27The question of compliance with By-Law 9 in the context of this combined personal and professional use of the same bank account raises a number of issues.

28By-Law 9 does not prohibit using the same bank account for personal and professional business transactions.

29The Law Society provides a helpful Bookkeeping Guide (the Guide) on its website. The Guide states:

You should avoid using a personal account as your firm’s general account. Whatever bank accounts you use for your practice must be produced on request of the Law Society. Personal accounts may not have the bank statements, returned cheques, and duplicate deposit slips you are required to keep for all your practice bank accounts.

30While the Guide discourages using a personal account as a general account, the Guide does not say that combined use is prohibited. But, as this case makes clear, using a personal account as a general account can raise significant practical problems.

31Section 18 of By-Law 9 provides that:

Every licensee shall maintain financial records to record all money and other property received and disbursed in connection with the licensee’s professional business, and, as a minimum requirement, every licensee shall maintain, in accordance with sections 21, 22 and 23, the following records ….

32Where a personal account is used as a general account, the question arises whether s 18 applies to all transactions, including personal transactions. Subsections 18(5), (6) and (10) are the relevant specific requirements:

5. A book of original entry showing all money received, other than money received in trust for a client, and identifying each date on which money is received, the method by which money is received, the amount of money which is received and the person from whom money is received.

6. A book of original entry showing all disbursements of money, other than money held in trust for a client, and identifying each date on which money is disbursed, the method by which money is disbursed, including the number or a similar identifier of any document used to disburse money, the amount of money which is disbursed and the person to whom money is disbursed.

7. Bank statements or pass books, images of cleared cheques and detailed duplicate deposit slips for all … general accounts.

33Following the hearing, I invited further submissions including with respect to the application of s 18 to transactions that are not part of the lawyer’s professional business as follows:

During the course of submissions, the Law Society’s position was that a lawyer who uses an account both as a general account and as a personal account must comply with section 18 of By-Law 9 with respect to transactions that are not part of the lawyer’s professional business. If there is authority for this proposition, please provide it.

34The Law Society did not provide any such authority. In written submissions, the Law Society did not submit that the s 18 requirements apply to personal transactions in a personal account that is also used as a general account.

35The Law Society’s submission was that investigators may need to be able to effectively review and account for all transactions, including personal transactions. This submission is obviously sound. Section 49.3(2) of the Act authorizes an investigator in an instructed investigation to require production of documents that “relate to matters under investigation”. For example, a licensee would presumably be required to produce documents in respect of personal transactions where compliance with s 18 of By-Law 9 is in issue and a personal account is used as a general account.

36However, it is a different question whether s 18 of By-Law 9 applies to personal transactions in the ordinary course.

37On its face, s 18 simply requires that records be maintained of transactions “in connection with the licensee’s professional business”. Personal transactions, even those in an account used as a general account, are not transactions in connection with the licensee’s professional business. By-Law 9 could say that s 18 records are required for all transactions in a general account, whatever their nature. But it does not.

38Considering the specific requirements of s 18, only s 18(10) need be considered. Clearly bank statements/pass books for a general account must be maintained whether or not the general account is used for personal transactions. It is not clear whether s 18(10) requires maintain images of cleared cheques and detailed duplicate deposit slips for personal transactions. The opening language of s 18 suggests not but there is an ambiguity.

39As for s 19 of By-Law 9, it applies to “Every licensee who receives cash”. Taking into account the intent and structure of By-Law 9, the most appropriate interpretation is that this provision applies to cash received in connection with a licensee’s professional business and does not extend to cash received in a licensee’s personal life.

Conclusion

40I conclude that a licensee is not required by s 18 to include personal receipts and disbursements in their receipts and disbursements journals because a personal account was used as a general account. I conclude that bank statements or pass books must be maintained for a personal account that is used as general account. I reach no conclusion with respect to images of cleared cheques and detailed duplicate deposit slips in respect of personal transactions as I need not do so and I do not have the benefit of submissions on the point.

COMPLIANCE WITH BY-LAW 9

41Considering s 7(2) of By-Law 9, Mr. Anthony-Adesina received trust money from clients. As a result, he was required by s 18 of By-Law 9 to maintain, among other things, trust receipts and disbursements journals, clients’ trust ledgers, monthly records of trust reconciliations.

42He breached s 7(2) by failing to treat money received as trust money and failed to maintain required trust records as a result. But this breach is not the subject of this application.

43In any event, Mr. Anthony-Adesina was required by ss 18 and 19 of By-Law 9 to maintain, among other things, the following in respect of his general account:

• receipts and disbursement journals;
• detailed duplicate deposit slips for his general account; and
• book of duplicate cash receipts.

44The investigator testified, by affidavit affirmed March 19, 2026, that the following remained outstanding from Mr. Anthony-Adesina:

• general account deposit slips from January 1, 2025 to current;
• general account receipts and disbursements journal from January 1, 2025 to current; and
• duplicate cash receipts book from January 1, 2025 to current.

45The investigator was not cross-examined.

46With respect to general account deposit slips, the investigator did not explain her conclusion. In submissions, the Law Society’s discipline counsel’s position was that all of the deposits to the general account had to be supported by deposit slips. On the above analysis, I am not satisfied that s 18 of By-Law 9 requires deposit slips for personal transactions in this context.

47As to the “General Account Receipts and Disbursements Journal”, the investigator suggested to Mr. Anthony-Adesina that he provide a receipts and disbursements journals for one month so that the investigator could assess compliance. This was a very sensible suggestion so that time and effort was not wasted creating over a year’s worth of non-compliant journals. Mr. Anthony-Adesina did as suggested. Whether the investigator has yet reviewed the sample for compliance is not in evidence. Mr. Anthony-Adesina has not yet provided journals for other months. It appears that he may not yet been able to so in light of the position taken by the investigator as to what is required.

48With respect to cash receipts book, it is unclear whether the investigator takes issue with the copies of cash receipts that have been provided. The investigator specifically stated in her affidavit that “I am unable to confirm if the receipts are complete since the Lawyer has not provided me with his receipts and disbursement journal which would show each receipt of funds in cash.”

49I am satisfied that Mr. Anthony-Adesina has violated s 18 of By-Law 9 by failing to maintain a receipts journal and a disbursements journal in respect of transactions in connection with his professional business.

50I am not satisfied that Mr. Anthony-Adesina has violated s 18 of By-Law 9 by failing to maintain detailed deposit slips in respect of personal transactions. No deficiency has been shown in respect of deposits in connection with his professional business.

51I am not satisfied that Mr. Anthony-Adesina has violated s 19 of By-Law 9 by failing to maintain a book of duplicate cash receipts. While the investigator reasonably observes that she cannot assess compliance unless and until she has a proper receipts journal, this does not demonstrate non-compliance.

52On these findings, I find that Mr. Anthony-Adesina has failed to maintain the books and records of his law practice, contrary to s 18 of By-Law 9. He thereby engaged in professional misconduct.

53It is important to recognize that this is only a “books and records” case. The Law Society has not alleged “failure to co-operate”. A failure to provide complete answers to investigative requests can often permit the inference that books and records have not been maintained. But that inference is not available here in respect of any failure to produce books and records of personal transactions that are not required to be maintained by By-Law 9.

54I have not considered whether Mr. Anthony-Adesina has failed to promptly and completely respond to investigative requests in respect of personal transactions because failure to co-operate has not been alleged and Mr. Anthony-Adesina has not had a fair opportunity to respond to any such allegation. I mean no criticism by making this observation but only wish to be clear what has and has not been decided and why.

Penalty

55The Tribunal’s jurisprudence is clear that the ordinary penalty order is as follows in a “books and records” case where there is no relevant discipline history:

• Where books and records are brought into compliance by the beginning of the merits hearing, a reprimand.
• Where compliance has not been achieved, an indefinite suspension pending compliance followed by a one-month definite suspension.

56It is valuable to ordinarily take this approach so that like cases are treated in like manner, so that there is a strong incentive to limit misconduct by encouraging compliance and so that specific and general deterrence are served.

57While analysis of the Aguirre factors can sometimes play a role, it is and should be unusual for mitigating factors to be of importance – other than mitigating circumstances that explain the failure to maintain books and records and the failure to achieve compliance before the hearing. As a result, and recognizing that suspension orders will be difficult for Mr. Anthony-Adesina, I place limited weight on his submissions as to the effect of a suspension order on him and his family.

58General deterrence is particularly important in fashioning the appropriate penalty. Licensees generally must understand that there are significant consequences for failure to maintain required books and records. A failure to treat non-compliance seriously can erode compliance generally.

59As said in Law Society of Upper Canada v van der Schel, 2012 ONLSHP 76 at para 3:

The maintenance of books and records, particularly in respect of trust funds, is a positive obligation and is not an optional activity for a licensee. It is an obligation that ranks as high and equal with every other obligation to serve our clients and the public interest. The record-keeping obligation is not one which takes second place to the performance of day-to-day work, the necessity to earn a living, nor is it diminished by a licensee's subjective knowledge of how to maintain books and records. Clients turn to us as a learned profession for the services we provide, and to the extent that we require assistance – for example, in respect of the maintenance of books and records – to the extent that we are incapable of performing them ourselves, we must turn to other professionals in order to ensure that we maintain compliance with the record-keeping obligations of the Law Society.

60It is also notable that failure to protect trust funds is a serious issue that is repeatedly addressed in conduct applications before the Tribunal. Non-compliance with books and records obligations can cause and can obscure breach of trust. For this reason, general deterrence and public confidence are engaged in ensuring that an appropriately serious penalty is ordered.

61In this case, I am concerned about the ongoing state of non-compliance. Clearly, Mr. Anthony-Adesina’s books and records are non-compliant. He does not have receipts and disbursement journals for his general account from January 2025 to date. Depending on what is disclosed by receipts and disbursement journals when prepared, it may be that there are missing cash receipts.

62In a responsible and helpful way, the investigator spoke with Mr. Anthony-Adesina on March 16, 2026, and explained the applicable requirements in detail and reviewed By-Law 9 with him. She “specifically explained what materials remained outstanding and why the documents he had recreated were still not in compliance with the by-law requirements.” She suggested he obtain records from his bank, if required.

63I am left uncertain whether the investigator’s position with Mr. Anthony-Adesina on March 16, 2026 was that compliance with s 18 required that the general account receipts and disbursement journals had to include personal transactions or whether she sought documentation in respect of personal transactions in order to confirm compliant journals with respect to transactions from Mr. Anthony-Adesina’s professional business.

64Because of this uncertainty, I am concerned that Mr. Anthony-Adesina may have been inadvertently put in the position that he did not bring his books and records into compliance because the investigator tried to assist him to do so, but on a basis different than I have concluded.

65This does not change the propriety of the one-month suspension. Nor does it change the need for Mr. Anthony-Adesina to bring his books and records into compliance.

66But it strikes me as unfair in these circumstances to order the indefinite suspension precede the one-month suspension. This unfairness is somewhat heightened by Mr. Anthony-Adesina’s submissions as to his family circumstances and his obvious desire to come promptly into compliance.

67Ordering that the definite suspension precede the indefinite suspension will give time for Mr. Anthony-Adesina to bring his books and records into compliance, taking into account these reasons and thereby potentially limit his suspension to one month. The rationale applied in Law Society of Ontario v Hans, 2021 ONLSTH 40 at paras 10-11 is not applicable here.

68Accordingly, I will order a one-month definite suspension followed by an indefinite suspension pending compliance.

COSTS

69The Law Society has incurred costs of $10,360. It seeks costs of $5,000 which is at the high end of the usual range.

70Given the limited framing of the notice of application, I conclude that a mid-range costs order of $3,500 is appropriate.

ORDER

71For these reasons, I order:

1. The respondent’s licence to practise law shall be suspended for a period of one month, starting upon the latter of:

a. April 15, 2026; and

b. the end of any and all current suspensions of the respondent’s licence to practise law under Part II of the Law Society Act.

2. Commencing at the end of the suspension ordered in paragraph 1 of this order, the respondent’s licence to practise law is suspended indefinitely until, to the satisfaction of the Law Society’s Executive Director, Professional Regulation or their designate, the respondent has demonstrated that all his books and records are current and in compliance with s 18 and s 19 of By-Law 9.

3. The respondent shall comply fully with the terms of the Law Society’s Guidelines for Lawyers Who Are Suspended or Who Have Given an Undertaking Not to Practise Law while suspended.

4. The respondent shall pay costs to the Law Society in the amount of $3,500 on or before the deadline of March 22, 2027. This deadline may be extended by the Law Society in accordance with the by-laws. Interest shall accrue on any overdue part of those costs at a rate of 4% per year.