An interlocutory suspension of a paralegal license was ordered by the Tribunal Hearing Division of the Upper Canada Law Society

 Mr. Usifoh (“the Paralegal”) has been a licensed paralegal since 2012, delivering legal services as a sole practitioner. On June 30, 2017, Justice H. Borenstein found the Paralegal guilty of five counts of fraud (four over $5,000 and one under $5,000), and six counts of laundering proceeds of a crime. Mr. Usifoh’s sentencing hearing was set for August 21, 2017. The offences occurred both before and after the Paralegal was licensed, over a period of about two years.

The convictions arise from activities related to e-mail fraud. Just over $250,000 of the funds remitted by the victims went either to the Paralegal’s personal or business bank accounts.

The Law Society submits that the convictions go to the Paralegal’s integrity and thus meet the test in s. 49.27 of the Law Society Act, RSO 1990, c. L.8 (the “Act”), although the convictions do not arise from activities done by the Paralegal in the delivery of legal services. The Law Society requests an interlocutory suspension of the Paralegal’s licence, pending the outcome of a conduct application.

The Paralegal submits that the motion for interlocutory suspension is premature, as he has not yet been sentenced or exhausted his appeals in the criminal matters.

We granted the interlocutory suspension, with reasons to follow. We need to decide whether the test in s. 49.27 of the Act is met, despite the fact that the convictions do not arise from delivery of legal services to clients and whether it is appropriate to exercise our discretion to suspend the Paralegal’s licence in these circumstances. We also need to decide whether the Law Society’s motion is premature.

Conclusion

A breach of integrity by a licensee, whether or not it involves a client, raises a significant risk of harm to members of the public, particularly where the breach involves receipt of other people’s money under false pretences. Convictions for fraud and money laundering go directly to the Paralegal’s integrity.

Conduct that compromises a licensee’s integrity invariably also undermines public confidence in the administration of justice, which causes harm: Law Society of Upper Canada v. Borkovich, 2015 ONLSTH 36 (CanLII). 

 We conclude that the Paralegal’s convictions for fraud and money laundering raise a significant risk of harm to members of the public and to public confidence in the administration of justice if the Paralegal is permitted to continue delivering legal services.

Suspension was not premature. (Mike Frisch)