Law Society of Ontario seeks feedback on proposed transparency measures

Consultation period open until November 30

Law Society of Ontario seeks feedback on proposed transparency measures

The Professional Regulation Committee of the Law Society of Ontario (LSO) has initiated a consultation to gather feedback on proposed recommendations aimed at increasing transparency within the legal profession.

The measures under review would require licensees to provide additional personal and business information to the LSO and mandate the LSO to disclose some of that some of that information if it serves the public interest.

In a statement published on the LSO’s website, the committee said the proposed measures would apply to addition information that is relevant to the practice of law and provision of legal services, including “a more comprehensive list of criminal and other charges, findings of guilt, business and trade names, and licensure in other provinces.”

The committee also said that it welcomes feedback from “all interested parties,” adding that any proposed changes will be presented to the Law Society’s board of directors for further consideration and approval.

The consultation period is open until November 30, 2024.

Importance of transparency and disclosure

Further details on the committee’s proposed recommendations have been outlined in a consultation report dated May 23, 2024.

The report highlighted the LSO’s regulatory functions, stating that existing rules on disclosures “does not ensure transparency or serve the Law Society’s public protection mandate.”

Under these rules, the LSO is currently not required to disclose to the public relevant information about licensees such as “outstanding criminal charges, bail conditions, findings of guilt, or the sentence imposed.”

The report went on to note that enhancing transparency is essential for allowing the public to choose legal representatives based on accurate information about licensees’ professional activities.

“The Law Society must have all information about a licensee that is relevant to their practice of law or provision of legal services and make that information available to the public when it is relevant to their choice of legal representative, may impact their health and safety, or may undermine public confidence in the professions,” the report said.

Recent articles & video

Both Rothstein leads Farris LLP as managing partner, shaping future legal talent

10th annual Readers' Choice survey now open

Three groundbreaking cases highlight Monique Pongracic-Speier's commitment to pro-bono work

BC Court of Appeal orders executor to provide estate invoices but can redact specific legal advice

Annie Piché appointed to Northwest Territories Supreme Court

BC Court of Appeal upholds class action certification in international price-fixing case

Most Read Articles

Ontario Superior Court upholds wrongful dismissal due to unenforceable termination provisions

Alberta Court of Appeal upholds adoption order despite biological father's objections

BC Court of Appeal displaces presumption of common law reasonable notice in wrongful dismissal case

BC Supreme Court disqualifies lawyer over misuse of privileged documents in estate litigation