Law Society of British Columbia v. Zoraik, 2015 BCCA 137

• Judge: Lowry, Kirkpatrick, Chiasson, MacKenzie and Goepel, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Case Date: February 02, 2015
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: 2015 BCCA 137;(2015), 370 B.C.A.C. 74 (CA)

B.C. Law Soc. v. Zoraik (2015), 370 B.C.A.C. 74 (CA);

    635 W.A.C. 74

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] B.C.A.C. TBEd. MR.065

The Law Society of British Columbia (respondent/plaintiff) v. Malcolm Hassan Zoraik (appellant/defendant) and Attorney General of British Columbia (respondent)

(CA041008; 2015 BCCA 137)

Indexed As: Law Society of British Columbia v. Zoraik

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Lowry, Kirkpatrick, Chiasson, MacKenzie and Goepel, JJ.A.

March 27, 2015.

Summary:

A lawyer was found guilty of public mischief, obstruction of justice and fabrication of evidence. A stay was entered on the obstruction of justice count. A conviction appeal was dismissed. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated. On June 16, 2010, the lawyer gave an undertaking to the Discipline Committee of the Law Society of British Columbia not to practise law until released by the Committee from that undertaking. He sought a penalty limited to his period of voluntary suspension and immediate reinstatement. The Committee referred the matter to the Benchers under Law Society Rule 4-40 to consider whether it should order a summary suspension or disbarment. The lawyer asserted that rule 4-40 contravened s. 7 of the Charter and requested that the Benchers decline to exercise their jurisdiction and remit the matter to the Committee for the issuance of a citation and a normal hearing which allowed for a range of dispositions not provided by the rule 4-40 process. The Benchers noted that the lawyer was not seeking a Charter remedy and, without addressing s. 7 or whether they could remit the matter to the Committee, ordered that he be disbarred. The lawyer appealed.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and remitted the matter to the Benchers. It was incumbent on the Benchers to consider the issues raised by the lawyer.

Administrative Law - Topic 556.1

The hearing and decision - Decisions of the tribunal - Issues raised must be decided - See paragraphs 17 to 38.

Administrative law - Topic 8905

Boards and tribunals - Duties of - Re application of constitution or constitutional principles - Charter - See paragraphs 17 to 38.

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 7603

Regulation - General - Appeals - See paragraphs 17 to 38.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Kienapple, [1975] 1 S.C.R. 729; 1 N.R. 322, refd to. [para. 2].

Wilson v. Medical Services Commission (B.C.) (1988), 53 D.L.R.(4th) 171 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

Okwuobi v. Quebec (Attorney General), [2005] 2 S.C.R. 257; 331 N.R. 300; 2005 SCC 16, refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. Conway (P.), [2010] 1 S.C.R. 765; 402 N.R. 255; 263 O.A.C. 61; 2010 SCC 22, refd to. [para. 22].

Counsel:

R.S. Tretiak, Q.C., and E.T. Chapman, for the appellant;

J. Rai, for the respondent, The Law Society of BC;

J. Penner, for the respondent, Attorney General of BC.

This appeal was heard at Vancouver, British Columbia, on February 2, 2015, by Lowry, Kirkpatrick, Chiasson, MacKenzie and Goepel, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. Chiasson, J.A., delivered the following reasons for judgment for the court on March 27, 2015.