|
Case Comment
continued from page 07
2008 Annual Accountability Report
|
Summary of Disciplinary Matters
Including Hearing Reports Issued between March 2009 and May 2009 |
In this Summary of Disciplinary Matters for the period March to May 2009, the LSA seeks to educate and inform lawyers on its role as a self-regulator in the public interest. The LSA completed 7 hearings and issued 3 hearing reports during this time which are summarized below.
|
Disbarment of A.
In considering the issues of lack of integrity and character displayed by A. in his misconduct that was "significant, deliberate, continuing and admitted", a LSA Hearing Committee had no option other than to disbar A.
Of particular significance in the Committee's decision-making was the high level of intent involved in the misconduct, the number of incidents involved and the length of time over which the misconduct occurred. A. was significantly behind in his remittances to Canada Revenue Agency and chose to continue collecting GST but not remit it.
In coming to its decision, the Committee noted the preface of the LSA Code of Conduct which reads as follows: Two fundamental principles underlie this Code and are implicit throughout its provisions. First, a lawyer is expected to establish and maintain a reputation for integrity, the most important attribute of a member of the legal profession. Second, a lawyer's conduct should be above reproach.
A. faced five citations when he met the Hearing Committee on November 3, 2008. A.:
(a) collected GST and then misappropriated or converted those funds to own personal use;
(b) collected retainers and then misappropriated or converted those funds to own personal use;
(c) disguised the receipt of income;
(d) lied to the Practice Assessors of the LSA; and
(e) failed to follow the accounting Rules of the LSA;
all of which was conduct deserving of sanction. |
 |
A., who had been admitted to the LSA in 1989, practised in small firm settings.
A Rule 130 audit was conducted with respect to his practice in June 2005. For the period from 1998 until his practice concluded in 2005, A. owed $48,000 in GST as well as additional undetermined amounts. Citations arose from concerns identified during the audit and following formal review and investigation. In response to those citations, A. admitted that his difficulties arose in 1989 when he fell behind in his obligations to the Canada Revenue Agency. A. admits that he did not seek assistance which he knew at the time was available from the LSA, including the Practice Review program and Assist.
A. was interim suspended by the LSA in August 2005 which prevented A. from continuing his misconduct. During this hearing, LSA Counsel referred to the primary purpose of Section 49 of the Legal Profession Act as protecting of the public interest and the standing of the legal profession generally.
Referring to the leading case being relied on in Alberta, being the Bolton v. Law Society case out of Britain, the LSA's counsel quoted the following excerpt:
"...the former solicitor may be able to point to real efforts made to re-establish himself and redeem his reputation. All of these matters are relevant and should be considered. But none of them touches on the essential issue, which is the need to maintain among members of the public a well-founded confidence that any solicitor whom they instruct will be a person of unquestionable integrity, probity and trustworthiness."
Counsel for the LSA spoke to the significance between a disbarment and a suspension on a "practical analysis".
continued on page 11 | |
