LAW SOCIETY TRIBUNAL
HEARING DIVISION
Date: April 16, 2026
Tribunal File No.: 25H-032
BETWEEN:
Law Society of Ontario
Applicant
- and -
Jasminder Singh
Respondent
Before: Mitchell K. Kitagawa (chair), Gisele Chretien, Stephen Rotstein
Heard: by written submissions
Appearances:
Amanda Pinto, for the applicant
No submissions from the respondent
Summary:
SINGH – Costs – After revoking the Lawyer’s licence the panel considered the issue of costs – The case was not particularly complex and neither party lengthened the proceedings – Because the Lawyer did not make any submissions there was no evidence as to inability to pay – The panel awarded the Law Society $15,000 in costs.
REASONS FOR DECISION ON COSTS
1Mitchell K. Kitagawa (for the panel):– On January 28, 2026 we released our reasons for the revocation of the licensee’s licence to practise law after a one-day hearing: 2026 ONLSTH 17. As part of our reasons, we encouraged the parties to agree on costs and if they could not, they were invited to provide written submissions which included limitations on timing and length. The LSO provided submissions, but the licensee did not.
2In its hearing brief, the Law Society had submitted its costs outline and dockets based on the tariff passed by Convocation which establishes hourly rates for licensees. It provided documentation to establish costs of $16,867 which excluded its time spent preparing oral submissions and attending the hearing. It seeks $15,000 in costs.
3For the reasons that follow, we award the Law Society costs of $15,000.
4The authority for us to award costs can be found in Rule 15.1(2)a of the Tribunal Rules of Practice and Procedure. It provides us with the ability to impose costs against a licensee who is subject of an adverse determination.
5Law Society Tribunal decisions Law Society of Upper Canada v Baker, 2006 ONLSHP 21 at para 12, and Law Society of Ontario v Perelli, 2018 ONLSTH 80 at para 30, have confirmed the principal that licensees as a whole should not shoulder the prosecution costs of proven misconduct.
6The approach for awarding costs was outlined in Law Society of Ontario v Khan, 2021 ONLSTA 7 at para 9. First, the tribunal is to consider the range of costs in similar cases and then factor in the following:
a. the complexity of the case;
b. any conduct during the Tribunal process that lengthened the proceedings;
c. any financial hardship that affects the ability of the licensee to pay; and
d. any other factors particular to the case.
7The range of costs for a case which takes one day or less to hear is between $3,000 and $15,000, based on a survey of cases found in Law Society of Ontario v Goldfinger, 2021 ONLSTH 53 at para 58, although that case was decided in 2021. With inflation, the end ranges would have since increased to a certain degree, but the amount being sought by the Law Society remains within the range.
8Returning to the factors to be considered, the case was not particularly complex. There is no evidence to the effect that the conduct of either party lengthened the proceedings. The same is true of any financial hardship affecting the ability of the licensee to pay. Because he made no submissions, we have no evidence before us to that effect.
9Considering the foregoing, we award costs to the LSO in the amount of $15,000 payable forthwith.
ORDER
10We make the following order:
The respondent shall pay $15,000 in costs to the Law Society immediately.
Interest on any unpaid amount shall accrue at the rate of 4% per year.