Citation issued: april 2, 2012

Gary Russell Vlug

Citations are issued by the Law Society of BC's Discipline Committee and list allegations against a lawyer which 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:

 Your Conduct Related to Your Client ES

1. In the course of representing your client ES, the respondent to a petition filed in British Columbia Supreme Court Vancouver Registry No. [number] alleging the wrongful retention in Canada of a child (the “Petition”), you represented that you had spoken by telephone with counsel for the petitioner, William Storey, who told you that he had delivered all the pleadings and affidavits filed in the Petition to Dr. Elterman, who was engaged to provide a “Views of the Child” report. This representation was not true and you made the representation when you knew or ought to have known it was not true, on the following occasions:

a. on May 12, 2009 in submissions made to a judge of the Supreme Court,

b. in a letter dated August 4, 2009 to the Law Society.

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

2. On or about May 24, 2009, in the course of representing your client ES in the Petition, you prepared and commissioned an affidavit sworn by ES, that contained in paragraph 31 a representation that “there was an active attempt by the Petitioner to deprive Dr. Elterman of the Respondent’s materials” and other related statements. This conduct was improper because:

a. you knew or ought to have known that the representation was not true, or

b. the affidavit was not competently drafted, contrary to Chapter 3, Rules 1 and 3 of the Professional Conduct Handbook, as it contained statements that were not identified as being made on information and belief and the source of such information was not identified.

This conduct constitutes professional misconduct or incompetent performance of duties undertaken in the capacity of a lawyer, pursuant to s. 38(4) of the Legal Profession Act.

3. On or about June 11, 2009, in the course of representing your client ES in an appeal of the decision made in the Petition filed in the Court of Appeal Vancouver Registry No. [number], you prepared and commissioned an affidavit sworn by ES, that contained in paragraph 10 a representation that “there was an active attempt by the Petitioner to deprive Dr. Elterman of the Respondent’s materials” and other related statements. This conduct was improper because:

a. you knew or ought to have known that the representation was not true, or

b. the affidavit was not competently drafted, contrary to Chapter 3, Rules 1 and 3 of the Professional Conduct Handbook, as it contained statements that were not identified as being made on information and belief and the source of such information was not identified.

This conduct constitutes professional misconduct or incompetent performance of duties undertaken in the capacity of a lawyer, pursuant to s. 38(4) of the Legal Profession Act.

4. On or about June 22, 2009, in the course of representing your client ES in the appeal of the decision made in the Petition, you represented to the Court of Appeal that you had not received a letter sent by William Storey, opposing counsel, in which he wrote that you were to provide to Dr. Elterman your client’s pleadings and affidavits filed in the Petition, when you knew or ought to have known that this representation was not true.

This conduct constitutes professional misconduct or incompetent performance of duties undertaken in the capacity of a lawyer, pursuant to s. 38(4) of the Legal Profession Act.

5. In or about 2009 and 2010, in the course of representing your client ES in the appeal of the decision made in the Petition and in the course of responding in an investigation by the Law Society of a complaint made by William Storey, you made discourteous and unfounded statements about Mr. Storey related to his letter dated April 2, 2009 to Dr. Elterman regarding the process for delivery of the pleadings and affidavits in the Petition:

a. on June 22, 2009 at the hearing of the appeal, you made submissions to the Court of Appeal to the effect that Mr. Storey had “duped” you;

b. in your letter dated December 2, 2009 to the Law Society, you stated words to the effect that Mr. Storey’s conduct was aimed at obtaining an advantage of some sort;

c. in your letter dated December 13, 2009 to the Law Society, you stated words to the effect that Mr. Storey’s letter was created with the intent of causing a slip that would further the advantage of providing only the other party’s pleadings and affidavits.

This conduct constitutes professional misconduct or incompetent performance of duties undertaken in the capacity of a lawyer, pursuant to s. 38(4) of the Legal Profession Act.

6. In or about 2009 and 2010, in the course of responding in an investigation by the Law Society of a complaint made by William Storey, you represented that during the hearing of the appeal of the decision in the Petition that occurred on June 22, 2009, the Court of Appeal had an “off-record” discussion with Mr. Storey regarding his conduct in not writing directly to you about the process by which all the pleadings and affidavits in the Petition would be provided to Dr. Elterman, when you knew or ought to have known that this representation was not true.

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

Your Conduct Related to your Client PS

7. On or about February 5, 2010, while acting for your client PS (also known as SY) in a family law action filed on or about October 30, 2008 in British Columbia Supreme Court New Westminster Registry under Action No. [number], you signed and caused another Writ and Statement of Claim to be filed in the Vancouver Registry of the British Columbia Supreme Court under Action No. [number] under the name “SY”, for the purpose of improperly avoiding the procedure to amend the statement of claim in the New Westminster action.

This conduct constitutes professional misconduct or incompetent performance of duties undertaken in the capacity of a lawyer, pursuant to s. 38(4) of the Legal Profession Act.

8. In or about February 2010, while acting for your client PS (also known as SY) in a family law action in British Columbia Supreme Court Vancouver Registry No. [number], you signed and caused a Statement of Claim to be filed on behalf of your client that stated:

There has been no other proceeding between or any agreement between the parties with respect to a separation between the parties or to the support or maintenance of a party or of party [sic] or a child of a party, or with respect to the division of property of the parties.

when you knew or ought to have known that statement was not true.

This conduct constitutes professional misconduct or incompetent performance of duties undertaken in the capacity of a lawyer, pursuant to s. 38(4) of the Legal Profession Act.

9. In or about February 2010, while acting for your client PS (also known as SY) in a family law action in British Columbia Supreme Court Vancouver Registry No. [number], you signed and caused a Statement of Claim to be filed on behalf of your client that stated:

It is impossible to obtain a certificate of the marriage or a certificate of the registration of the marriage because there is an emergency need to for [sic] a Certificate of Pending Litigation to stop the transfer of matrimonial assets to China OR sale and liquidation of matrimonial assets and then transfer, outside of the jurisdiction of the court. A copy of the Marriage Certificate will be provided shortly.

when you knew or ought to have known that statement was not true.

This conduct constitutes professional misconduct or incompetent performance of duties undertaken in the capacity of a lawyer, pursuant to s. 38(4) of the Legal Profession Act.

Your Conduct Related to Your Client MW

10. On or about February 23, 2011, in the course of representing your client MW in a family law action in British Columbia Supreme Court New Westminster Registry No. [number], you prepared and commissioned an affidavit sworn by MW that contained a statement that implied his 2009 Notice of Assessment was attached to his Form 89 financial statement sworn March 19, 2010 and delivered to the opposing party on or about March 28, 2010 and to her counsel on or about April 7, 2010, when you knew or ought to have known that statement was not true, and subsequently you filed this affidavit in court.

This conduct constitutes professional misconduct or incompetent performance of duties undertaken in the capacity of a lawyer, pursuant to s. 38(4) of the Legal Profession Act.

11. On or about October 4, 2011, in the course of representing your client MW in a family law action in British Columbia Supreme Court New Westminster Registry No. [number], you prepared and commissioned an affidavit sworn by MW, that contained a statement that counsel for the opposing party had complained to the Law Society that you had included “too much financial disclosure” in your client’s financial statement, when you knew or ought to have known that statement was not true, and you subsequently filed this affidavit in court.

This conduct constitutes professional misconduct or incompetent performance of duties undertaken in the capacity of a lawyer, pursuant to s. 38(4) of the Legal Profession Act.