The most widely read magazine for Canadian lawyers
Issue link: https://digital.canadianlawyermag.com/i/50838
exercise," wrote tribunal justices Martin Hébert, Danielle Côté, and François Godbout. In its Feb. 20, 2007 decision refus- ing to reinstate Parizeau, the Comité des requêtes said Parizeau had not shown a real change of attitude in her testimony during three days of hearings in June 2006 and offered a "hodgepodge" of reasons for the conduct that led to a seven-year disbarment and $5,600 in fines back in 2000. (The sanction was reduced to five years and some charges dropped after lawyer Julius Grey argued on her behalf in a previous separate hearing before the tribunal.) Accordingly, the Comité des requêtes said it could not, under power accorded to it under article 70 of the Loi sur le Barreau, rule that she "possesses the morals, con- duct, competency, knowledge, and quali- ties required to exercise the profession of law." The Barreau's disciplinary commit- tee had determined that Parizeau was a danger to society based on her behaviour during a divorce case almost a decade earlier when she fabricated evidence (she falsified a bill of her services), incited a client to lie about her expenses in court, destroyed evidence (a client's hotel bill), and filed so-called "useless proceedings" before the court. In the 1980s and 1990s, Parizeau was one of the province's most well-known divorce lawyers, often representing the wives of Montreal's wealthy, but also pow- erful men like Quebecor Inc. media baron Pierre Péladeau — and often in the news for her flamboyant style. The Montreal Gazette in 1995 reported on Parizeau's "judicial guerrilla warfare," condemned by four judges during a short period. All four cases involved nasty battles that basically led to the financial ruin of the warring couples. Although no formal complaint was lodged, during her Barreau readmission hearing, Parizeau was grilled about the judges' comments on her behaviour in those rulings and her one-time use of retainers, a practice she changed after a warning from the syndic of the Barreau — facts not lost on either the tribunals profession or the Quebec Court of Appeal. The Comité des requêtes exceeded its legal mandate by acting as a disciplin- ary committee and placed too much emphasis on Parizeau's disagreement with some of the judges' comments and "underweighted and ignored" evidence and testimony presented on her behalf. Noted in the two rulings is support from two judges for her readmission. Quebec Superior Court Justice Louis S. Tannenbaum (now deputy judge of the Federal Court) and a noted divorce law- yer before his judicial appointment, had supervised her refresher course prior to the readmission application and said "she understood and regretted her past errors." Quebec Court of Appeal Justice Allan R. Hilton also vouched for her in a letter of support and Alan Stein of Montreal's Stein & Stein Inc. offered tutelage over her work and accounting for two years. Stein is the former Barreau de Montréal bâtonnier who represented Parizeau before the Comité des requêtes and then, at the professions tribunal, with former Barreau du Québec bâton- nier Guy Pepin, now strategic counsel for Bélanger Sauvé LLP, who says he agreed to work pro bono on the grounds that fair play is needed in the read- mission process for disbarred lawyers. (James Woods of litigation boutique Woods LLP worked with Stein at the Quebec Court of Appeal.) The Quebec Court of Appeal judg- rendered by justices François ment, Pelletier, François Doyon, and Marie- France Bich, "establishes two very important principles," says Stein. "One, that the Tribunal des professions is a true court of appeal, and two, that the powers of a Comité des requêtes are restricted and it cannot act as a disci- plinary committee. They are restricted in their powers of review. They can't go into all the files or the history of the law- yer. They have to look at the position of the lawyer at the time of the application for reinstatement. There was no issue of her competence." The Barreau du Québec says it does not comment on court cases, but is analyzing the appeal court judgment, and has 60 days from the ruling date to decide whether to apply for leave for appeal at the Supreme Court of Canada. Micheline Parizeau, who has been practising law since the Tribunal ruling, said in an interview "a book has closed" with the Court of Appeal judgment. "Whatever was done, or the road that was followed, might have many reasons, including the fact that each administrative body wants to keep their power and that is beyond my case. This will clarify the position, which is important for everyone else also," she said. "I am 67 going on 50. It is a passion for me, the practice of law, so as long as I am healthy and capable I would like to continue." — KATHRYN LEGER kathryn.leger@videotron.ca News Feed Lerners' TOP 5 Lerners picks the Court of Appeal's Top 5 civil decisions from this summer, and, for diversion, our Top 5 books that will keep you up too late reading this fall. www.lerners.ca/appeals/appeal_newsletters.cfm And the Zenith goes to… Lerners' Shannon Puddister, who was awarded a Lexpert Zenith for Individual Philanthropy for his work with Kulemela (kulemela. org) in promoting technical and engineering know-how in sub-Saharan Africa. www.lerners.ca Le wa fo wo or en su Your First Civil Appeal – Go/No Go? Lerners partner Carolyn Brandow provides insights on whether, when and how to appeal as a guest speaker at OBA's October 20th Your First Civil Appeal conference. See Carolyn's bio on lerners.ca. www.lerners.ca www.CANADIAN Lawyermag.com OCTO BER 2011 9 erners_Newsfeed_CL_Oct_11-BOLD.indd 1 11-09-16 11:36 AM