LSO TRIBUNAL REPORT
1. What is the mission of the Tribunal?
The Tribunal's goal is to give the public access to specialist administrative justice. It
makes decisions on appeals involving citizens and public administrations in the areas of
social affairs, real estate, economic affairs, territory and environment, and mental health
with excellence, coherence, and promptness.
2. What is the legislation that governs the Tribunal?
The Statutory Powers Procedure Act, also referred to as "the Act," sets a broad
framework for how hearings before Ontario's administrative tribunals are conducted. A
new section has been inserted into the Act that, unless an exemption exists, makes it
illegal to record or publish a tribunal hearing as of June 3, 2021.
3. Who are the adjudicators who hear the complaints? How are they chosen?
Like judges in courts, adjudicators, or members of the tribunal, represent the panels that
hear and determine matters before the tribunal. They could be "benchers," or members
of Convocation's board of directors, the Law Society, or appointees, which are other
competent adjudicators chosen by Convocation.
4. What kinds of cases does the Tribunal decide?
Tribunal proceedings address the qualifications, behaviour, or personality of a paralegal
or lawyer (licensee), or a lawyer or paralegal application (license applicant).
5. Where does the Tribunal sit?
Most proceedings take place at the Tribunal office in Toronto, Ontario at 375 University
Avenue, Suite 402.
1. Who were the parties in the hearing?
Law Society of Ontario, and Rabah Yaacoub Moubarak,
2. What was the complaint against the lawyer or paralegal?
The complaint was against the Lawyer
3. What legislation, by-laws, rules or guidelines were relied on by the Tribunal in
addressing the complaint?
Law Society Act, RSO 1990, c L-8: In Ontario, Canada
Rules of professional Conduct: Rule 6.3-3 deals with discrimination and harassment
and offers guidelines for proper behaviour while interacting with others, especially legal
firm workers.
Rule 6.3-0: This rule probably outlines some important phrases and ideas that are
important to Rule 6.3-3, such as what sexual harassment is and what kinds of behaviors
are considered breaches of professional conduct.
4. What was the outcome of the hearing?
We stopped when they were trying to decide whether Dr. Kim should be considered as
an expert witness or not. The doctor was their first witness.
5. What are your impressions of the hearing?
In my opinion, there are several disadvantages to virtual hearings like those held
through Zoom when compared to in-person procedures. The mood, which lacks the
seriousness usually associated with face-to-face conversations, is one obvious contrast.
It's possible for participants to feel too comfortable in their homes, which might lessen
the gravity of the proceedings. As a result, rather than being a formal court proceeding,
the hearing might occasionally resemble a relaxed online gathering, which might block
communication.
Positively, I think Muneeza did a good job of refreshing the doctor's memory and helping
him recall important details during the hearing with his skillful questions.
1. Who were the parties in the hearing?
Adam Robin William Graham Tye and Law Society of Ontario
2. What was the misconduct that the LSO claimed Tye had committed?
Tye was accused of professional misconduct, especially intimate partner violence
against their partner, and of acting in a manner unworthy of a barrister or solicitor. The
Law Society of Ontario (LSO) considered the gravity of the behaviour, considering that
Tye had physically abused their intimate partner, acknowledged the behaviour, and
entered a guilty plea to an assault charge. In the end, the LSO determined that the
behaviour did not qualify for an Invitation to Attend (ITA), which led to a suspension of
one month and a $3,000 fee requirement.
3. What legislation, by-laws, rules or guidelines were relied on by the Tribunal
in addressing the complaint?
The Law Society Act (Ontario):
Ontario Regulation 167/07 (O.Reg. 167/07)
The Statutory Powers Procedure Act (Ontario)
4. What was the outcome of the matter?
The regulatory organization that investigated the matter and filed the complaint against
Tye was the Law Society of Ontario. The amount of time that passed between the Law
Society's original complaint and the Hearing Committee's decision to disbar Tye led to
the main problems in the case. Due to the situation, Tye's license was issued with the
condition that they would not interact with young children unattended. But the Law
Society of Ontario had yet to file an appeal against Tye's licensing decision.
5. What are your impressions of the decision?
I was impressed with the tribunal's thorough and fair decision-making procedure in both
cases. The panel came to its decisions after considering the evidence given and
applying relevant legal principles. The second decision's ruling to sustain Tye's
penalties emphasizes how crucial it is for the legal profession to promote ethical
behaviour and professional standards.
Although Tye's license to practice law will be suspended for eighteen months, this is a
substantial sanction that is justified considering the gravity of the offending. The ruling
makes it very apparent to the legal community that acting in a way that is inappropriate
for a lawyer, violating client confidentiality, and having sexual interactions with clients
are unacceptable.
