Court of Appeal blocks man who abused children from being called to Ontario bar, orders new hearing
Ontario's Court of Appeal found a Law Society tribunal’s 2023 ruling that a man was of ‘good character’ was unreasonable, and ordered a new licensing hearing focused on public trust.
Copy link
By Torontoer Staff
Ontario’s Court of Appeal has overturned a Law Society tribunal decision and barred a man who admitted sexually abusing children from being called to the bar, sending the matter back for a fresh good-character hearing. The court ruled the tribunal’s 2023 finding that the man, identified only as AA under a publication ban, met the threshold for licensure was unreasonable because it did not adequately consider public trust in the legal profession.
A unanimous three-judge panel, writing for the court, also found that a condition added by the tribunal, that AA not be alone with children, conflicted with the conclusion that he was of good character and raised unresolved concerns about ongoing risk.
What the court said
Justice Lorne Sossin wrote the tribunal’s analysis did not consider whether licensing AA would be consistent with public trust and confidence in the legal professions. The court said the tribunal failed to weigh the seriousness of AA’s admitted assaults in relation to public confidence.
The hearing division’s analysis does not reflect any consideration of whether granting AA a licence would be consistent with public trust and confidence in the legal professions.
Justice Lorne Sossin
Background of AA’s applications and the tribunal ruling
AA admitted to sexually abusing children over a three-month period in 2009 while studying abroad to become a spiritual leader. The conduct involved mutual touching while clothed. He was never criminally charged, but a children’s aid agency learned of the abuse when he returned to Canada and recommended he not be alone with children.
AA first applied to be called to the bar in 2012 and did not disclose the abuse. The Law Society learned of the allegations through an anonymous tip and AA abandoned that application. He re-applied years later and admitted to having been dishonest in his earlier application.
- 2009: AA admits to sexually abusing children while studying abroad.
- 2012: First application to be called to the bar, without disclosure of the abuse; application abandoned after an anonymous tip.
- 2023: Law Society Tribunal hearing division finds AA of good character and imposes a condition that he not be alone with children.
- 2024/2025: Court of Appeal hears Law Society appeal and rules the tribunal’s 2023 decision was unreasonable, ordering a new good-character hearing.
Risk assessment and the tribunal’s reasoning
A psychiatrist said AA had a diagnosis of paedophilic disorder in remission, indicating past symptoms but an asserted current low overall risk. The tribunal in 2023 accepted that AA had made significant progress, acknowledged his conduct and undergone treatment, and concluded that adding a condition barring him from being alone with children would enhance public confidence.
The Court of Appeal disagreed, saying that imposing such a condition actually undermines the finding that AA meets the good-character threshold. Justice Sossin wrote that a condition singling out a specific demographic appears to be the first of its kind in a good-character ruling, and that its inclusion suggests the tribunal recognised an ongoing risk to children from AA’s licensure.
The condition itself suggests that AA cannot be trusted to be alone with children. This is fundamentally at odds with the conclusion that AA presently meets the threshold of good character.
Justice Lorne Sossin
Responses from the parties and the regulator
AA’s lawyer, James Melnick, said they were reviewing the decision. In an email, he wrote, "There is no room for doubt that public confidence in the legal professions is of paramount importance in all licensing applications. I hope this decision helps bring clarity and a sense of confidence to that desired end."
The Law Society welcomed the Court of Appeal’s guidance, saying the court emphasised that protecting the public interest and public confidence are the overriding principles in licensing decisions. The regulator had argued the tribunal failed to adequately consider those principles when it found AA met the good-character requirement.
Why the ruling matters
The decision clarifies how licensing bodies must balance evidence of rehabilitation against the need to maintain public trust. It signals that tribunals cannot separate findings about an applicant’s character from the broader impact of licensure on the profession’s reputation and public confidence.
The Court of Appeal has ordered a new good-character hearing before the tribunal. That hearing must explicitly address whether licencing AA would be consistent with public trust and confidence and reconcile any conditions with the overall character finding.
The case is notable for raising difficult questions about rehabilitation, transparency and regulatory responsibility when an applicant has admitted past sexual misconduct involving children. It is likely to affect how future licensing decisions treat similar disclosures and conditions.
The Court of Appeal’s ruling does not itself bar AA permanently from the profession, but it requires the tribunal to reassess the application in light of public interest principles. The timing of any new hearing and further steps will depend on the tribunal’s schedule and the parties’ next moves.
Law SocietyCourt of Appeallegal licensingpublic trustsexual abuse
