Police block corruption probe

Consultative process on judges is cloaked in secrecy

Case botched against lawyer, regulator says

Client of disgraced lawyer goes after 'careless' bar society

NOTE: Majority of the documents are in PDF format. Click below to get free reader

If you filed a complaint against a member of the Law Society of Upper Canada after January 1, 1999 you may have a cause of action and be entitled to receive compensation.

If you filed an appeal with the office of the complaints resolution commissioner after the law society failed to investigate your complaint in any meaningful way and provide a fair process and a just outcome, you may have a cause of action and be entitled to receive compensation.

Law Society of Upper Canada
 Class Action Notice
June 2011

To be part of this Class Action, call us or email us using this form

905-374-2689   between 9am - 5pm EST. Monday to Saturday

Background

In 1990, the Law Society of Upper Canada took it upon itself to organize, incorporate and operate its own wholly-owned insurance company subsidiary, the Lawyer's Professional Indemnity Company (HLPIC"), to pursue the mandatory captive professional indemnity insurance market of its members.

The incorporation of LPIC constituted a conflict of interest and conflicting fmancial interest on the part of the law society that breached the Society's role statement, that is to say, "The Law Socie!y' of Upper Canada exists to govern the legal profession in the public interest". By 1994, LPIC had accumulated a massive $200 million deficit.

To prevent further financial losses and overcome the massive $200
million deficit on the part of its 'insurance business', the Law Society of
Upper Canada remained 'willfully blind' to public complaints and failed
to discipline countless offences on the part of its members including, but'
not limited to, negligence, professional misconduct, conduct
unbecoming, fraud, sexual assault and solicitation to commit murder.

The Attorney General for the Province of Ontario and the Treasurer of
the Law Society of Upper Canada at the material time proactively
contravened the Law Society Act; betrayed the public trust; and,
knowingly recommended Convocation appoint a person as Complaints
Resolution Commissioner when said person was in a conflict of interest
and receiving a financial benefit as an executive member of the
Lawyer's Professional Indemnity Company.

The Attorney General for the Province of Ontario, the Treasurer of the
Law Society of Upper Canada, the Lawyer's Professional Indemnity
Company and the Complaint Resolution Commissioner owed a duty to
the justice system and the people of Ontario which ensured a fair process and a just outcome.

The members of the Board of LPIC rule out any suggestion that LPIC
managed the liability insurance program independent of the Law Society
of Upper Canada after 1995. The annual report LPIC released in 1999
confirmed the interests of the law society continued to be well
represented on the LPIC Board by six Bencher Directors, and Directors
from CDLPA, CBAO and the Advocates Society.

Disclaimer

Ontario Chapter

905-374-2689