Law Times

Law Times • June 12, 2017 Page 3 www.lawtimesnews.com Criminal charges laid for fraud, breach of trust LSUC disbars lawyer for misapplying $2.6 million BY ALEX ROBINSON Law Times T he Law Society of Up- per Canada has re- voked the licence of a lawyer for misapplying $2.6 million he received in trust from real estate transactions. A discipline tribunal found lawyer Andrew Tulk misled and failed to serve his clients on nine real estate transactions. In a scheme that spanned roughly five years, Tulk used the funds that he had received for real estate purchases to keep his failing practice af loat, according to the tribunal's decision in Law Society of Canada v. Tulk. "Mr. Tulk's law practice was running at a loss. He simply de- cided he would continue operat- ing it as he saw fit," the decision said. "As he described it to us, he set up a scheme whereby he cov- ered any new losses by treating his trust account as if it were a business account." When his practice fell into a $400,000 hole, Tulk started us- ing trust monies to pay off per- sonal living expenses and the operational costs of his firm. He shuff led funds in a "ponzi" or "shell game" in order to cover up the trust losses that were ac- cumulating and used client ad- vances and mortgage advances to pay off a previous mortgage so that "the money was completely rolling over and over and over again," the decision said. Tulk is also facing criminal charges, according to the deci- sion, which include two counts of fraud, one count of breach of trust and one count of using a forged document. The law society first received a complaint concerning one of these transactions from one of Tulk's clients in 2012. She said the lawyer had failed to dis- charge an outstanding mortgage in a timely manner. The LSUC then launched an investigation into Tulk after receiving a letter in 2013 from a lawyer at Tulk's firm, identi- fied in the decision as "CB", who was also the daughter of the cli- ent who made the original com- plaint. CB had confronted Tulk after overhearing some clients accus- ing the lawyer of stealing their money. In that confrontation, Tulk ". . . acknowledged that out of bitterness for the way the Law Society has treated him over the years," he had been committing mortgage fraud for five years and using the funds to run the firm. It was after this confrontation that CB sent her letter. When a law society investiga- tor met with Tulk at his office, he gave her 10 signed cheques with more than $2.6 million related to the nine real estate transactions and said he did not have the money in trust to cover them. He claimed he had been using clients' trust funds to prop up his practice, which had been operating at a loss for years. Tulk, who was called to the bar in 1970, denied committing mortgage fraud at hearings, but he also openly acknowledged that he had been deliberately misappropriating funds. It was not the first time Tulk has faced discipline proceed- ings, as he was also suspended for six months in 1993 for per- sonal misconduct. He was also reprimanded in 2009 for making inappropriate and abusive comments to op- posing counsel. Over the course of the re- cent hearing, Tulk said he had been treated unfairly by the law society in these two previous proceedings. He described the decisions as "dead wrong" and that they had affected his ability to make a living. "Nothing said on these points justified his outrageous and egregious actions," the decision said about the grievances he ex- pressed about the law society. When his practice fell into fi- nancial trouble, Tulk considered closing it, but he decided "the hell with it" and started using trust monies to prop it up, ac- cording to the decision. In the hearings, Tulk said he consid- ered this a way of "fighting back" or waging "warfare with the Law Society." In addition to the finding that Tulk had missaplied $2.6 million, the tribunal panel also determined that the lawyer had also misapplied an additional $12,657 in trust monies that were paid into his trust account from a holdback for repairs on a real estate sale and money se- cured as a settlement payment in a civil lawsuit. The law society panel found that revoking a lawyer's licence is the appropriate penalty in mis- appropriation cases except in exceptional circumstances. The panel determined that Tulk had not suffered from "an isolated lapse of judgment" and that he had admitted he knew he would eventually be disbarred when he started the misappro- priation scheme years ago. "In his penalty submissions, Mr. Tulk acknowledged that he regretted what he had done," the decision said. "He described it as both stupid and wrong. How- ever, at the same time he stated that at 'another level' he wished that he had been able to carry on longer." In addition to disbarring Tulk, the law society ordered him to pay $30,000 in costs. A spokeswoman for the law society said the regulator's posi- tion was set out at the hearing. Tulk could not be reached for comment. LT NEWS The Law Society of Upper Canada has dis- barred Andrew Tulk for professional mis- conduct. JUDICIAL VACANCY ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE BARRIE The Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee advises the Attorney General of Ontario on the appointment of Judges to the Ontario Court of Justice, and invites applications for a judicial position in Barrie. This appointment involves presiding over criminal law matters and also involves travel within the regional boundaries as assigned by the Regional Senior Justice and/or the Chief Justice. The minimum requirement to apply to be a Judge in the Ontario Court of Justice is ten years completed membership as a barrister and solicitor at the Bar of one of the Provinces or Territories of Canada. All candidates must apply either by submitting 14 copies of the current (February 2016) completed Judicial Candidate Information Form in the first instance or by a short letter (14 copies) if the current form has been submitted within the previous 12 months. Should you wish to change any information in your application, you must send in 14 copies of a fully revised Judicial Candidate Information Form. If you wish to apply and need a current Judicial Candidate Information Form, or if you would like further information, please contact: Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee Tel: (416) 326-4060 Fax: (416) 212-7316 Website: www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj/jaac/ All applications, either sent by courier, mail or hand delivery, must be sent to: Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee c/o Ministry of Government Services Mail Delivery 77 Wellesley Street West, Room M2B-88 Macdonald Block, Queen's Park Toronto, Ontario, M7A 1N3 Applications must be on the current prescribed form and must be TYPEWRITTEN or COMPUTER GENERATED and RECEIVED BY 4:30 p.m. on Friday, June 30, 2017. CANDIDATES ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 14 COPIES OF THEIR APPLICATION FORM OR LETTER. A Fax copy will be accepted only if 14 copies of the application or letter are sent concurrently by overnight courier. Applications received after this date WILL NOT be considered. The Judiciary of the Ontario Court of Justice should reasonably reflect the diversity of the population it serves. Applications from members of equality- seeking groups are encouraged. JUDICIAL VACANCY ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE OSHAWA The Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee advises the Attorney General of Ontario on the appointment of Judges to the Ontario Court of Justice, and invites applications for a judicial position in Oshawa. This appointment involves presiding over criminal law matters and also involves travel within the regional boundaries as assigned by the Regional Senior Justice and/or the Chief Justice. The minimum requirement to apply to be a Judge in the Ontario Court of Justice is ten years completed membership as a barrister and solicitor at the Bar of one of the Provinces or Territories of Canada. All candidates must apply either by submitting 14 copies of the current (February 2016) completed Judicial Candidate Information Form in the first instance or by a short letter (14 copies) if the current form has been submitted within the previous 12 months. Should you wish to change any information in your application, you must send in 14 copies of a fully revised Judicial Candidate Information Form. If you wish to apply and need a current Judicial Candidate Information Form, or if you would like further information, please contact: Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee Tel: (416) 326-4060 Fax: (416) 212-7316 Website: www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj/jaac/ All applications, either sent by courier, mail or hand delivery, must be sent to: Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee c/o Ministry of Government Services Mail Delivery 77 Wellesley Street West, Room M2B-88 Macdonald Block, Queen's Park Toronto, Ontario, M7A 1N3 Applications must be on the current prescribed form and must be TYPEWRITTEN or COMPUTER GENERATED and RECEIVED BY 4:30 p.m. on Friday, June 30, 2017. CANDIDATES ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 14 COPIES OF THEIR APPLICATION FORM OR LETTER. A Fax copy will be accepted only if 14 copies of the application or letter are sent concurrently by overnight courier. Applications received after this date WILL NOT be considered. The Judiciary of the Ontario Court of Justice should reasonably reflect the diversity of the population it serves. Applications from members of equality- seeking groups are encouraged. Untitled-2 1 2017-06-06 12:53 PM

• Cover