Focus On

REGULATION OF PROFESSION - Legal practice - Unlawful practice

Monday, December 23, 2019 @ 6:18 AM  


Lexis Advance® Quicklaw®
Appeal by Kalo from a permanent injunction prohibiting legal practice or provision of legal services. The Law Society of Manitoba applied for injunctive relief based on evidence appellant was not entitled to practice law in Manitoba and had done so by acting for clients in civil proceedings, advising clients, and providing legal services. Appellant challenged process by seeking conversion of application into action. Alternatively, appellant sought case management, judicial dispute resolution, leave to examine third parties, and to have supporting affidavits struck. The judge found that an application was the appropriate process, and that there was no merit for the alternative relief sought. The judge found that the evidence established the appellant's provision of a variety of legal services, including involvement in court proceedings, and concluded that a permanent injunction was necessary for protection of the public. Kalo appealed.

HELD: Appeal dismissed. The appeal was without merit. The appellant acted as a lawyer in six matters before the Court of Queen's Bench and sought to act as an agent in a regulatory disciplinary matter. He held himself out as having legal education and experience. He attempted to appear as a lawyer in the Court of Appeal. The judge applied the correct legal test and made no palpable and overriding error in the application of the law to the facts. The findings of fact were amply supported by the evidence. A permanent injunction was warranted in the circumstances, and necessary for protection of the public.

Law Society of Manitoba v. Kalo, [2019] M.J. No. 298, Manitoba Court of Appeal, D.M. Cameron, J.A. Pfuetzner and J. leMaistre JJ.A., November 6, 2019. Digest No. TLD-December232019002