Martin et al., Re, [2005] B.C.T.C. 586 (SC)

• Judge: Burnyeat, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
• Case Date: February 09, 2005
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: [2005] B.C.T.C. 586 (SC);2005 BCSC 586

Martin, Re, [2005] B.C.T.C. 586 (SC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2005] B.C.T.C. TBEd. JN.006

In The Matter Of the Custodianship of John Taylor Martin, Craig Kiyokata Iwata and Martin and Associates Law Corporation

(L032913; 2005 BCSC 586)

Indexed As: Martin et al., Re

British Columbia Supreme Court

Vancouver

Burnyeat, J.

April 29, 2005.

Summary:

This headnote contains no summary.

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 7705

Regulation - Custodian - Appointment of - Substituting custodians - See paragraphs 1 to 35.

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 7710

Regulation - Custodian - Appointment of - Duties of custodian to lawyer's clients - See paragraphs 1 to 35.

Cases Noticed:

Volrich v. Law Society of British Columbia (1988), 29 B.C.L.R.(2d) 392 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 5].

Volrich v. Macaulay, McColl (1989), 62 D.L.R.(4th) 598 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 5].

Hean Wylie Peach de Stefanis, Re, [2004] B.C.T.C. 10; 24 B.C.L.R.(4th) 306 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 12].

Confectionately Yours Inc. et al., Re (2002), 164 O.A.C. 84; 36 C.B.R.(4th) 200 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 17].

Hean Wylie Peach de Stefanis, Re (2005), 210 B.C.A.C. 171; 348 W.A.C. 171 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 23].

Kenny, Re, [2002] B.C.T.C. 346 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 28].

Statutes Noticed:

Legal Profession Act, S.B.C. 1998, c. 9, sect. 50(1), sect. 50(5), sect. 50(6)(d), sect. 50(6)(e), sect. 51(a), sect. 51(h), sect. 51(i), sect. 54(1), sect. 54(2)(a), sect. 54(2)(b), sect. 55, sect. 56(1), sect. 56(2), sect. 56(3), sect. 86 [para. 3].

Counsel:

K.S. Campbell, for the Custodian, Helen Ray del Val and the Law Society of British Columbia.

This case was heard in Chambers, on February 9, 2005, and by written submission on March 11, 2005, before Burnyeat, J., of the British Columbia Supreme Court, who delivered the following decision on April 29, 2005.

Please note: The following judgment has not been edited.