Counsels

The Complaints Authorization Committee counselled a member that the member’s conviction under sections 253(b) and 255(1) of the Criminal Code does not comply with the standard of conduct contemplated by Chapter II, rule 2.1-1, commentaries [1] and [4] of the Code of Professional Conduct. The Committee noted that this is the member’s first offence and that the member cooperated fully with the Law Society. However, in the opinion of the Committee such conduct does not meet the standard of conduct required by the Code of Professional Conduct and expected by the public. Furthermore, the member was reminded that Law Society members are obliged to have knowledge of the Law Society Act, 1999, the Law Society Rules and the Code of Professional Conduct, including but not limited to reporting requirements, and to practice within the scope of them.

The Complaints Authorization Committee counselled a member that the member’s conviction under sections 253(b) and 255(1) of the Criminal Code does not comply with the standard of conduct contemplated by Chapter II, rule 2.1-1, Commentaries [1] and [4] of the Code of Professional Conduct. The Committee noted that this is the member’s first offence and that he cooperated fully with the Law Society. However, in the opinion of the Committee such conduct does not meet the standard of conduct required by the Code of Professional Conduct and expected by the public.

The Complaints Authorization Committee counselled a member that the member’s failure to complete the work in a timely manner and to keep the client adequately informed, as per the member’s admission, does not comply with the standard of conduct contemplated by Chapter III, rule 3.2-1 of the Code of Professional Conduct. The Complaints Authorization Committee counselled the member that the quality of service standard prescribed by the Code of Professional Conduct contemplates that work will be completed in a timely manner and that clients will be adequately informed with respect to the progress of work. Furthermore, the member was counselled to adhere to this standard in the future.

Cautions

The Complaints Authorization Committee cautioned a member that the quality of service provided by the member, does not comply with the standard of conduct contemplated by Chapter III, rule 3.2-1 of the Code of Professional Conduct. The Complaints Authorization Committee cautioned the member that the Code of Professional Conduct prescribes a quality of service standard requiring service that is competent, timely, conscientious, diligent, efficient and civil. Further, the member was cautioned to adhere to this standard in the future. Furthermore, the CAC is of the opinion that the standard requires that the client file should be documented and indicative of the lawyer’s work product.