Amourgis v. Law Society of Upper Canada, (1984) 7 O.A.C. 23 (DC)

• Judge: Labrosse, Montgomery and O'Brien, JJ.
• Court: Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada)
• Case Date: October 31, 1984
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1984), 7 O.A.C. 23 (DC)

Amourgis v. LSUC (1984), 7 O.A.C. 23 (DC)

MLB headnote and full text

Amourgis v. Law Society of Upper Canada

(No. 1121/82)

Indexed As: Amourgis v. Law Society of Upper Canada

Ontario Divisional Court

Labrosse, Montgomery and O'Brien, JJ.

December 11, 1984.

Summary:

A lawyer pleaded guilty to many allegations of professional misconduct. The Discipline Committee of the Law Society of Upper Canada and Convocation disbarred him for such conduct. The lawyer appealed and also applied for judicial review of the Committee's and Convocation's decisions.

The Ontario Divisional Court, in a decision reported in 5 O.A.C. 286, dismissed the appeal and application.

Meanwhile, a single judge of the Divisional Court granted an order enjoining the lawyer from engaging directly or indirectly in the practice of law. The Law Society subsequently applied to jail the lawyer for contempt for his alleged breach of the court order.

The Ontario Divisional Court dismissed the application, because the Law Society failed to prove its allegations beyond a reasonable doubt.

Contempt - Topic 5108

Practice - Hearing - Adjournments - On conditions - A law society alleged contempt by a disbarred lawyer because of his alleged breach of a court order to refrain from practising law - The lawyer applied for an adjournment of the hearing, on his undertaking not to set foot on any legal premises or communicate with anyone about legal matters (except his own counsel) - The Ontario Divisional Court refused to adjourn on this condition, because it would not adequately protect the public and could not reasonably be enforced - See paragraphs 11 to 12.

Contempt - Topic 5082

Practice - Evidence and proof - Standard of proof - The Ontario Divisional Court held that on an application by a law society to commit a disbarred lawyer to jail for contempt for his alleged breach of an order to refrain from practising law, the onus was on the society to prove its allegations beyond a reasonable doubt - See paragraphs 13, 45.

Cases Noticed:

Canada Metal Co. Ltd. et al. v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. et al. (No. 2) (1975), 4 O.R.(2d) 585, aff'd. (1976), 11 O.R. 167 (Ont. C.A.), appld. [para. 13].

R. v. Vezeau (1976), 8 N.R. 235; 28 C.C.C.(2d) 81 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 46].

Counsel:

T.J. Lockwood, Q.C., for the Law Society of Upper Canada;

J.L. Pinkofsky, for Constantine Amourgis.

This application was heard before Labrosse, Montgomery and O'Brien, JJ., of the Ontario Divisional Court on October 31, 1984. The decision of the Divisional Court was delivered orally and released on December 11, 1984.