Complaints, Lawyer Discipline and Public Hearings

 

Citation issued: December 15, 2017; amended March 6, 2018

Homayoun Sebastian Nejat

Citations are authorized by the Law Society of BC's Discipline Committee and list allegations against a lawyer that will be considered at a discipline hearing. Please note that allegations in a citation are unproven until a discipline hearing panel has determined their validity.

Nature of conduct to be inquired into:

1.  In the course of acting for your client BD regarding an appeal of a provincial court family law matter, you misled your client by doing some or all of the following:

a)  stating in an email dated September 28, 2015, that the written outline had been sent to the court for filing when it had not been;
b)  failing to advise your client after June 14, 2016 that opposing counsel had filed an application for dismissal of the appeal;
c)  telling your client by email dated June 29, 2016 that a hearing had been set for the end of July to “determine the issue of perfecting the appeal” and failing to tell your client that the date was set to hear the opposing party’s application to dismiss the appeal; and
d)  after the appeal was dismissed on July 28, 2016, failing to advise your client that the appeal had been dismissed because of the opposing party’s application.

This conduct constitutes professional misconduct, pursuant to s. 38(4) of the Legal Profession Act.

2.  On July 28, 2016, in the course of acting for your client BD regarding an appeal of a provincial court family law matter, you represented to the court that you had instructions to bring an application to extend the time to perfect your client’s appeal when you knew you did not have those instructions.

This conduct constitutes professional misconduct, pursuant to s. 38(4) of the Legal Profession Act.

3.  Between approximately August 2015 and August 2016, in the course of representing your client BD regarding an appeal of a provincial court family law matter, you failed to provide your client with the quality of service that is expected of a competent lawyer in a similar situation, contrary to one or more of rules 2.2-1, 3.1-2 or 3.2-1 of the Code of Professional Conduct for British Columbia by failing to do one or more of the following:

a)  keep your client reasonably informed about the status of the appeal;
b)  answer your client’s reasonable requests for information and documents;
c)  answer, within a reasonable time, communications from your client that required a reply;
d)  ensure that the work on the appeal was done in a timely manner so that its value to your client was maintained;
e)  provide your client with complete and accurate relevant information about his matter.

This conduct constitutes professional misconduct, pursuant to s. 38(4) of the Legal Profession Act.