Complaints, Lawyer Discipline and Public Hearings

Summary of Credentials Decision

Applicant 9

Hearing (application for enrolment): December 15-16, 2015 and February 2, 2016

Panel: Jamie Maclaren, Chair; Dr. Gail Bellward and Sandra Weafer

Decision issued: April 25, 2016 (2016 LSBC 14)

Counsel: Gerald Cuttler for the Law Society; Henry C. Wood, QC for Applicant 9

BACKGROUND

On October 29, 2014, Applicant 9 applied for enrolment as an articled student in the Law Society admission program. On May 6, 2015, the Credentials Committee ordered a hearing to determine whether the applicant meets the standard for enrolment as an articled student under section 19(1) of the Legal Profession Act.

The hearing panel inquired into a number of circumstances.

On or about September 22, 2006, the applicant’ s driver’ s licence was suspended for 30 days following two marijuana-related incidents. In one he was found by police to be smoking marijuana in his vehicle; in the other he was issued a 24-hour driving prohibition for operating his vehicle while under the influence of marijuana.

In summer 2009, while working as a pizza delivery person in Kamloops, the applicant was friendly with the owners’ 15-year-old daughter. Her mother discovered indecent messages and photographs exchanged between her daughter and the applicant, and contacted police. The applicant pleaded guilty to the summary conviction offence of Internet luring on August 23, 2011. He was sentenced to a one-year conditional sentence with a probation order. His sentence included an automatic order that he comply with the Sex Offender Information Registration Act for a period of 10 years.

In November 2014 the applicant attended a social evening organized by the UBC Law Students Society at which he flung the contents of his alcoholic beverage at a classmate’ s back. As a result, he was banned from future Law Students Society social events.

The following month, the applicant was subjected to a roadside alcohol test for which he registered a “ fail” status. His vehicle was impounded, and he received a 90-day driving prohibition.

DECISION

After considering all of the evidence and submissions, the hearing panel found that the applicant failed to establish, on a balance of probabilities, that he is fit to be enrolled as an articled student.

An unsuccessful applicant for enrolment may reapply for enrolment two years after the decision denying the application or after an earlier date set by the panel. The panel did not consider it necessary for the applicant to wait two years before reapplying for enrolment, and therefore reduced the applicant’ s minimum time period for re-application to 12 months from the date of the panel’ s decision.

 

2016 LSBC 14 Decision on Application for Enrolment