Law Times

Law Times • November 28, 2011 Panel dismisses misconduct finding Continued from page 1 But the fact that lawyers who haven't passed the test to be a lawyer are applying to become paralegals raises concerns about them being allowed into our ranks." Th e issue surfaced this month in Conway's successful appeal of his disbarment. Th e LSUC disbarred him in May after a hearing panel found he had engaged in professional misconduct in three separate cases by acting as a paralegal in the Small Claims Court between 2007 and 2009 despite not having a licence. It originally suspended him administratively in 2000 for not paying his Law- PRO fees. Representing himself on the appeal, Conway argued that the law society had erred in dismissing his application for a paralegal licence under the new regulations by not holding a proper hear- ing to discuss the matter and by fi nding him to have engaged in professional misconduct by serving as a paralegal. A fi ve-member law society appeal panel agreed with Conway's arguments this month given its view that "since the appellant was entitled to have his application processed, and to a good character hearing, at the society's instance, the society was not authorized, in law, to eff ectively refuse his application by declining to process it. Th e society was also not authorized, in law, to disqualify the appel- lant from status as a grandparented paralegal based on the facts." Th e panel went on to allow Conway's appeal and set aside and dismissed the fi ndings of misconduct as well as a $5,000 costs order against him. "I thought the appeal panel's ruling was fair," Conway tells Law Times. "Th ey dealt with the real issues involved while the previous panel did not. On the one hand, it feels good to reach a deci- sion, and on the other hand, I haven't been able to work for seven months. I'll have to start rebuilding my practice and I received no cost awards from the law society." Conway adds he was disturbed by the fact that, according to him, the law society took four diff erent positions on the rules and regulations related to grandparented paralegals and paralegal li- censing during his case. Th is caused the LSUC to contradict itself, he claims, noting it fi rst cited issues related to his suspension and later went on to say he couldn't hold two licences simultaneously while applying for paralegal status under the new guidelines. "Th e LSUC essentially gets to walk away in all of this," he says. "No one holds them accountable when they make mistakes and they don't acknowledge it and take responsibility for their actions." For its part, the appeal panel found there was nothing "implicit or explicit in the act or bylaw 4 (before or after its amendment on January 24, 2008) that dictates that a suspended lawyer cannot apply for a Class P1 licence or qualify as a grandparented paralegal pending the resolution of that application." It added: "Of course, if such an applicant successfully meets the preconditions for the issuance of a Class P1 licence, including where required, proof of his/her good character at a hearing, the issuance of that licence cannot occur until his/her Class L1 licence has been surrendered or revoked." But in e-mailed responses to questions on the issue, law society spokeswoman Denise McCourtie reiterated the LSUC's position that "it is possible for lawyers who have had their licences revoked for disciplinary reasons to apply for either a lawyer licence or para- legal licence." "In many cases, they will be required to fi rst demonstrate that they have been rehabilitated and are presently of good character," she added. "Under the Law Society Act, an applicant for a licence who meets all other requirements but whose good character is in issue cannot be denied a licence without a hearing before the hear- ing panel." McCourtie noted that the law society's bylaws also stipulate that suspended lawyers applying to become licensed paralegals can't hold two licences at the same time. "If an individual holds a licence as a lawyer that is suspended, that person must resolve the issue that led to the suspension and surrender his or her licence before he or she can be licensed as a paralegal," she said. But according to disbarred lawyer and legal activist Harry Kopyto, there are inherent contradictions in the rules that the law society doesn't want to acknowledge. "Th e real reason or the el- ephant in the room that everyone knows but no one is saying is that any lawyer who is subject to grandparenting or is accepted as a paralegal has to establish they are of good character," he says. "Yet when lawyers are disbarred or suspended, it is presumed they are, of course, not of good character, which begs the question: if they are allowed to be licensed as a paralegal, why would they not be allowed to be licensed as lawyers?" Kopyto adds that although several disbarred or suspended ap- plicants have applied to become paralegals, few have been success- ful. "Th ey are worried that disbarred and suspended lawyers will begin using this as a back door to get into the legal profession. Th ey are worried it could be used to circumvent the normal way of becoming a lawyer." NEWS PAGE 5 Report encouraging: Pawlitza Continued from page 1 work," said Lorne Sossin, dean of Osgoode Hall Law School. "Th at can be seen as either good or bad de- pending on wheth- er or not you're the glass-half-full or glass-half-empty type, but we like to think of it as a positive sign and we hope this re- port builds on this evidence and ac- tion in the future." Another issue Distribution of lawyer population in Ontario Source: The Geography of Civil Legal Services in Ontario by Jamie Baxter and Albert Yoon addressed in the re- port was the num- ber of lawyers and paralegals working in rural communities. While the numbers are generally in line with population data, it called for action to further refl ect the needs of the com- munities. According to the report, large geographi- cal areas in places like northwestern Ontario had as few as 38 lawyers, while major metro- politan regions like Toronto had as many as 11,000 of them in 2009. Still, law society Treasurer Laurie Pawlitza said the report is encouraging despite those chal- lenges. "Th e report confi rms something we long suspected," said Pawlitiza. "It's clear to us that there needs to be greater support in these areas, particularly for what we call soles and smalls. Th e LSUC thinks tremendous progress has been made so far and will continue to work toward targeting increases in access to justice." MAP THE CORRECT COURSE OF ACTION FOR CROSS-BORDER LITIGATION CROSS-BORDER LITIGATION: INTERJURISDICTIONAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE KENNETH C. MacDONALD Cross-Border Litigation: Interjurisdictional Practice and Procedure provides guidance on all aspects of cross-border litigation. It will help you better understand the legal considerations involved, such as: • Where is the best place to sue • Strategies for challenging the plaintiff's choice of venue • How to ensure proper service outside your jurisdiction • How to determine which jurisdiction's laws apply • Obtaining evidence from other jurisdictions • Responding to requests for evidence from other jurisdictions • Pleading and proving foreign law • Pre-judgment cross-border remedies • Enforcing foreign judgments at home and domestic judgments abroad ORDER # 804484-60527 $120 Hardcover 424 pages May 2009 978-0-88804-484-6 Shipping and handling are extra. Price subject to change without notice and subject to applicable taxes. Practical features include a Decision Tree, providing step-by-step guidance through the analysis of where a case should be litigated; Appendices with information relating to the Hague Service Convention; Glossary of Terms; and Tables to summarize treaties pertaining to litigation and to compare inter-provincial subpoena legislation across Canada. AVAILABLE RISK-FREE FOR 30 DAYS Order online at www.canadalawbook.ca Call Toll-Free: 1-800-387-5164 In Toronto: 416-609-3800 CANADA LAW BOOK® www.lawtimesnews.com

• Cover
• Law Bids
• Oklahoma Scams
• Focus On Business of Law