Tim Leahy in a discussion forum talks about his suspension.
Roy K.
Trim LEAHY SUSPENDED; CIC TELLS EVERYONE - WHY?
When the government celebrates that a regulatory body suspends one of their members it makes me think that CIC does not like the attention that Counsel brings to the Immigration process.
If Jason Kenney and CIC had nothing to hide and did everything by the Law there would be no need for the likes of Tim Leahy.
Shame on you Jason!
1 day ago
Nicole R.
I thought, this sort of stuff doesn't happen in Canada! ... Maybe, there will be another Operational Buleting comming out when Tim cleares his name...
1 day ago
Roy K.
I have experience with complaints like all others in this business. I'm just not afraid to talk about it. The larger the client base one has the greater chance that one will feel a need to complain. I have had two complaints with the current regulator and am amazed that I got the complaints in the first place.
The first complaint took me 3 days to compile the evidence in support of my actions and was found to be unfounded. The current one should be dealt with the same way but why does the regulator ask one to reply to frivolous complaints I don't understand.
This complaint from the article is about Tim not responding in time. When your running a business over the Christmas holidays what does any regulator expect. Forget buying Mom a present, forget serving the paying clients or drop everything and respond immediately.
1 day ago
Roy K.
Timothy Edward Leahy (1991), of the City of Toronto, was found to have engaged in professional misconduct for:
failing to co-operate with an investigation of the Law Society by failing to produce information and documents requested in Law Society communications.
By Decision and Order dated December 06, 2012 the hearing panel ordered as follows:
The Lawyer is suspended for 60 days, commencing on February 1, 2013, and continuing indefinitely thereafter until he has produced, to the satisfaction of the Director of Professional Regulation, a complete response to N. Woloszczuk's written communications dated May 1, 2012, May 29, 2012, June 5, 2012, June 6, 2012, and June 18, 2012.
The Lawyer shall comply fully with the terms of the Law Society's Guidelines for Lawyers who are Suspended or who have Given an Undertaking Not to Practise, while suspended pursuant to this Order.
The Lawyer shall pay costs to the Law Society in the amount of $5,827.08 within twelve months of the date of this Order, failing which interest will accrue at a rate of 3% per annum thereafter.
1 day ago
may F.
So are you saying that CIC has intentionally prosecuted Tim by announcing his suspension to the public? Are you implying that the last complaint against Tim might have been moved by CIC itself behind the scene?
I really do not know whom to believe nowadays. In many immigration forums Tim is not very much appreciated now,,,,,,lost his case in 14th of December and now this suspension,,,,,does not give a good impression about him.
I have to say however that Tim continues to be the most responsive among immigration lawyers,,,,never failed to answer a question with a detailed if not a lengthy answer,,,,worked always through weekend and vacation. His enthusiasm for his clients causes is unparalleled and makes him a good support for prospective immigrants in difficult times.
21 hours ago
Tim L.
Dear Roy,
You hit the nail on the head. Tobi had the notice even before it reached the website. So, you have correctly guessed her source. Not only that, but, after she published her first article, her "source" revisited her, after which she significantly revised her story.
Here's the first version:
http://www.cireport.ca/2013/02/toronto-lawyer-timothy-leahy-suspended-for-seeking-to-overhaul-canadas-immigration-system.html
In 2007, they did something very similar but even more malicious. At that time they told everyone at CIC to find all of my clients and notify them that CIC would not do business with and to retain someone else if they wanted a representative. Reason: Because I am general counsel to a corporation, the Law Society of Upper Canada in its infinite wisdom listed me as "not practicing law -- employer other" at Forefront Migration Ltd. CIC said that, because I was not, therefore, required to have Errors & Omission insurance I did not meet the definition of "authorized representative", which is defined as "a member in good standing" in a provincial law society or the consultants' regulatory body -- which, as I was listed as a Member (not under suspension) in their source, the LSUC directory, they knew full well that I met the definition. Needless to say, they never asked me if I had E&O insurance (and I did). Ultimately LSUC changed my listing, and CIC sent out a third direction to the field five months later, saying that they may resume dealing with me.
When six Chinese work permit applicants in Hong Kong refused to fire me, John Burroughs rejected all of their applications, claiming that they lacked the experience required to do the jobs, which included cleaning the floor and machinery in a factory producing Chinese fortune cookies and taking bags of such cookies off a conveyor belt and putting them in a box. All unskilled jobs. Such is the integrity of CIC officials.
So, it's just par for the course at CIC. It's neither the first, nor will it be the last salvo, from CIC, and it has not, and will now, cow me. In time, matters will be righted.
21 hours ago
Roy K.
@may farouk
Did you read the article? What I am saying is CIC TELLS EVERYONE - WHY?
The article starts with the government has taken the UNUSUAL step of warning staff at CIC, CBSA and Foreign Affairs of Tim Leahy suspension. The government has informed all that the torn in their sides Immigration business is dead and DO NOT DEAL with him for any reason on any file. Do not give him an update, Do not speak to him!
@Nicole was shocked at this behavior and replied that she hopes they issue a OB when he has the matter resolved with the LSUC.
I am not a conspiracy theorist but Jasons behavior is clear as the pimple on your nose to Nicole and me as well the author of the article.
Clients are never happy when their Counsels lose.
When an Immigration Counsel wins he/she did nothing. When they lose it is all their fault.
Always been that way, will always be that way.
21 hours ago
Tim L.
Dear Nichole,
Yes, it occurs in Canada because all too many judges in the Federal Court have bought into the view all too many CIC officers have of themselves; i.e., that they are Canada's very own Herrenvolk; confirming the admonition of Lord Acton, who wrote in 1887: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. ... The final heresy is to sanctify holders of office." Unless and until the Federal Court ceases to refuse to hold immigration officials to account, they will continue to do whatever they want, confident that nothing untoward will occur to them.
Murray Oppurtshauser, who had reigned over Hong Kong, Manila, Rome and Buffalo said when at Buffalo to a group of immigration lawyers: "Of course I know the law. Sometimes I follow it; sometimes I don't. Sometimes I get caught; sometimes I don't. Sometimes I get my wrists slapped; sometimes I don't." While cynical, it is completely accurate thanks to their superiors, who ignore any abusive conduct toward anyone whose fate they hold in their hands, and to their buddies on the bench, who are so protective that they routinely excise the names of the officers involved whenever they are obliged to rule against them in order to preclude applicants' counsel from being able to build a case against an officer who continues to disregard the law time and time again.
21 hours ago
Tim L.
Thanks, May, for the kind words.
21 hours ago
Roy K.
Regulators do strange things as well to remove thorns in their sides as well. I had one complaint for four years with CSIC which Guidy represented me on pro bono. The only reason they dispensed with it was because of a client had finally complained and that complaint was ordered by a brand new Lawyer who filed an application with the Federal court alleging I was incompetent.The LSUC used it as an example of how NOT to complain about former Counsel at their annual summit.
ICCRC had me reply to a complaint by a bondsperson for not taking them into a GTA detention centre nor having a retainer agreement with them and most important not getting their spouse a release order. Of course the Inmate was my client, I had a one page retainer agreement with him, he forgot to tell me he used to be a PR who never showed at his appeal plus had over 200 convictions that the Ministers Counsel handed me as evidence at the start of the hearing. He forgot to mention he had 11 fail to comply with release orders, two escape custody, three assault of a Police Officer.
It took three days to reply wanting to make sure everything I wrote down could be defended on appeal because it could take away my families livelihood.
21 hours ago
Raj S.
What do you expect. Intimidation seems par for the course. Kenneys minions also complained to the law society over Guidy's comments on Black: http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/lawyer-says-kenneys-office-tried-to-intimidate-him-over-conrad-black-comments/article4451188/?service=mobile
19 hours ago
Roy K.
I remember when I started working for Immigration as a Hearings and Appeals Officer I was told to watch out for a scum bag of a Counsel.
His clients being basically Jamaican boys were always in trouble but he was a challenge during any detention review or admissibility hearing. I always found him a challenge to win against, he was always well prepared but came across as a country bump-kin deliberately.
This Counsel has been in the business very active for the last 30+ years and he is still winning cases on a daily basis. He bought his own Office Building when I just started out now his sons are doing the business.
If I go to GTEC with a suit on you should see them start running around looking for the TV cameras/media. Just wait till CIC finds out whom my firm has hired.
18 hours ago
Nicole R.
@Tim,
Thank you for clarifying the matter. It is shocking to learn, that the government has this sort of influence over the court system. I know...some may say, how naive of me!
Maybe one should read, review and guide their wisdom by the most loved British judge of all times...
So far as the country is concerned, hitherto every judge on his appointments discard all policies and prejudices. The judges of England have always in the past- I hope always will- be vigilant in guarding our freedoms. Someone must be trusted. Let it be the judges.
Lord Denning
....I would certainly expect the same standards from the Canadian courts!
@May
I followed Tim's actions on various forums and press releases. Sometimes lawyers win, sometimes they loose. And sometimes the loss isn't through their inability... It is apparent that Tim's case is clouded by controversy. Even if you set aside the legalities, everyone can see what's happen to those stuck in the system is wrong!
What is highly commendable, that against all odds, this person has decided to take on the government and fight for the injustice, that has been done to so many. Something, that's certainly not easy to do. Tim and Roy fight for what they believe is right, despite the fact, that this has a negative effect on their lifes! We can all sit here and pretend that everything is fine, but who are we kidding? Many will read this post, maybe even agree, but will not comment due to the fear of consequences. But if everyone does that, we maybe in risk of dictatorship!
@Roy
Just keep doing, what you do best!
13 hours ago
Roy K.
Trim LEAHY SUSPENDED; CIC TELLS EVERYONE - WHY?
When the government celebrates that a regulatory body suspends one of their members it makes me think that CIC does not like the attention that Counsel brings to the Immigration process.
If Jason Kenney and CIC had nothing to hide and did everything by the Law there would be no need for the likes of Tim Leahy.
Shame on you Jason!
1 day ago
Nicole R.
I thought, this sort of stuff doesn't happen in Canada! ... Maybe, there will be another Operational Buleting comming out when Tim cleares his name...
1 day ago
Roy K.
I have experience with complaints like all others in this business. I'm just not afraid to talk about it. The larger the client base one has the greater chance that one will feel a need to complain. I have had two complaints with the current regulator and am amazed that I got the complaints in the first place.
The first complaint took me 3 days to compile the evidence in support of my actions and was found to be unfounded. The current one should be dealt with the same way but why does the regulator ask one to reply to frivolous complaints I don't understand.
This complaint from the article is about Tim not responding in time. When your running a business over the Christmas holidays what does any regulator expect. Forget buying Mom a present, forget serving the paying clients or drop everything and respond immediately.
1 day ago
Roy K.
Timothy Edward Leahy (1991), of the City of Toronto, was found to have engaged in professional misconduct for:
failing to co-operate with an investigation of the Law Society by failing to produce information and documents requested in Law Society communications.
By Decision and Order dated December 06, 2012 the hearing panel ordered as follows:
The Lawyer is suspended for 60 days, commencing on February 1, 2013, and continuing indefinitely thereafter until he has produced, to the satisfaction of the Director of Professional Regulation, a complete response to N. Woloszczuk's written communications dated May 1, 2012, May 29, 2012, June 5, 2012, June 6, 2012, and June 18, 2012.
The Lawyer shall comply fully with the terms of the Law Society's Guidelines for Lawyers who are Suspended or who have Given an Undertaking Not to Practise, while suspended pursuant to this Order.
The Lawyer shall pay costs to the Law Society in the amount of $5,827.08 within twelve months of the date of this Order, failing which interest will accrue at a rate of 3% per annum thereafter.
1 day ago
may F.
So are you saying that CIC has intentionally prosecuted Tim by announcing his suspension to the public? Are you implying that the last complaint against Tim might have been moved by CIC itself behind the scene?
I really do not know whom to believe nowadays. In many immigration forums Tim is not very much appreciated now,,,,,,lost his case in 14th of December and now this suspension,,,,,does not give a good impression about him.
I have to say however that Tim continues to be the most responsive among immigration lawyers,,,,never failed to answer a question with a detailed if not a lengthy answer,,,,worked always through weekend and vacation. His enthusiasm for his clients causes is unparalleled and makes him a good support for prospective immigrants in difficult times.
21 hours ago
Tim L.
Dear Roy,
You hit the nail on the head. Tobi had the notice even before it reached the website. So, you have correctly guessed her source. Not only that, but, after she published her first article, her "source" revisited her, after which she significantly revised her story.
Here's the first version:
http://www.cireport.ca/2013/02/toronto-lawyer-timothy-leahy-suspended-for-seeking-to-overhaul-canadas-immigration-system.html
In 2007, they did something very similar but even more malicious. At that time they told everyone at CIC to find all of my clients and notify them that CIC would not do business with and to retain someone else if they wanted a representative. Reason: Because I am general counsel to a corporation, the Law Society of Upper Canada in its infinite wisdom listed me as "not practicing law -- employer other" at Forefront Migration Ltd. CIC said that, because I was not, therefore, required to have Errors & Omission insurance I did not meet the definition of "authorized representative", which is defined as "a member in good standing" in a provincial law society or the consultants' regulatory body -- which, as I was listed as a Member (not under suspension) in their source, the LSUC directory, they knew full well that I met the definition. Needless to say, they never asked me if I had E&O insurance (and I did). Ultimately LSUC changed my listing, and CIC sent out a third direction to the field five months later, saying that they may resume dealing with me.
When six Chinese work permit applicants in Hong Kong refused to fire me, John Burroughs rejected all of their applications, claiming that they lacked the experience required to do the jobs, which included cleaning the floor and machinery in a factory producing Chinese fortune cookies and taking bags of such cookies off a conveyor belt and putting them in a box. All unskilled jobs. Such is the integrity of CIC officials.
So, it's just par for the course at CIC. It's neither the first, nor will it be the last salvo, from CIC, and it has not, and will now, cow me. In time, matters will be righted.
21 hours ago
Roy K.
@may farouk
Did you read the article? What I am saying is CIC TELLS EVERYONE - WHY?
The article starts with the government has taken the UNUSUAL step of warning staff at CIC, CBSA and Foreign Affairs of Tim Leahy suspension. The government has informed all that the torn in their sides Immigration business is dead and DO NOT DEAL with him for any reason on any file. Do not give him an update, Do not speak to him!
@Nicole was shocked at this behavior and replied that she hopes they issue a OB when he has the matter resolved with the LSUC.
I am not a conspiracy theorist but Jasons behavior is clear as the pimple on your nose to Nicole and me as well the author of the article.
Clients are never happy when their Counsels lose.
When an Immigration Counsel wins he/she did nothing. When they lose it is all their fault.
Always been that way, will always be that way.
21 hours ago
Tim L.
Dear Nichole,
Yes, it occurs in Canada because all too many judges in the Federal Court have bought into the view all too many CIC officers have of themselves; i.e., that they are Canada's very own Herrenvolk; confirming the admonition of Lord Acton, who wrote in 1887: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. ... The final heresy is to sanctify holders of office." Unless and until the Federal Court ceases to refuse to hold immigration officials to account, they will continue to do whatever they want, confident that nothing untoward will occur to them.
Murray Oppurtshauser, who had reigned over Hong Kong, Manila, Rome and Buffalo said when at Buffalo to a group of immigration lawyers: "Of course I know the law. Sometimes I follow it; sometimes I don't. Sometimes I get caught; sometimes I don't. Sometimes I get my wrists slapped; sometimes I don't." While cynical, it is completely accurate thanks to their superiors, who ignore any abusive conduct toward anyone whose fate they hold in their hands, and to their buddies on the bench, who are so protective that they routinely excise the names of the officers involved whenever they are obliged to rule against them in order to preclude applicants' counsel from being able to build a case against an officer who continues to disregard the law time and time again.
21 hours ago
Tim L.
Thanks, May, for the kind words.
21 hours ago
Roy K.
Regulators do strange things as well to remove thorns in their sides as well. I had one complaint for four years with CSIC which Guidy represented me on pro bono. The only reason they dispensed with it was because of a client had finally complained and that complaint was ordered by a brand new Lawyer who filed an application with the Federal court alleging I was incompetent.The LSUC used it as an example of how NOT to complain about former Counsel at their annual summit.
ICCRC had me reply to a complaint by a bondsperson for not taking them into a GTA detention centre nor having a retainer agreement with them and most important not getting their spouse a release order. Of course the Inmate was my client, I had a one page retainer agreement with him, he forgot to tell me he used to be a PR who never showed at his appeal plus had over 200 convictions that the Ministers Counsel handed me as evidence at the start of the hearing. He forgot to mention he had 11 fail to comply with release orders, two escape custody, three assault of a Police Officer.
It took three days to reply wanting to make sure everything I wrote down could be defended on appeal because it could take away my families livelihood.
21 hours ago
Raj S.
What do you expect. Intimidation seems par for the course. Kenneys minions also complained to the law society over Guidy's comments on Black: http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/lawyer-says-kenneys-office-tried-to-intimidate-him-over-conrad-black-comments/article4451188/?service=mobile
19 hours ago
Roy K.
I remember when I started working for Immigration as a Hearings and Appeals Officer I was told to watch out for a scum bag of a Counsel.
His clients being basically Jamaican boys were always in trouble but he was a challenge during any detention review or admissibility hearing. I always found him a challenge to win against, he was always well prepared but came across as a country bump-kin deliberately.
This Counsel has been in the business very active for the last 30+ years and he is still winning cases on a daily basis. He bought his own Office Building when I just started out now his sons are doing the business.
If I go to GTEC with a suit on you should see them start running around looking for the TV cameras/media. Just wait till CIC finds out whom my firm has hired.
18 hours ago
Nicole R.
@Tim,
Thank you for clarifying the matter. It is shocking to learn, that the government has this sort of influence over the court system. I know...some may say, how naive of me!
Maybe one should read, review and guide their wisdom by the most loved British judge of all times...
So far as the country is concerned, hitherto every judge on his appointments discard all policies and prejudices. The judges of England have always in the past- I hope always will- be vigilant in guarding our freedoms. Someone must be trusted. Let it be the judges.
Lord Denning
....I would certainly expect the same standards from the Canadian courts!
@May
I followed Tim's actions on various forums and press releases. Sometimes lawyers win, sometimes they loose. And sometimes the loss isn't through their inability... It is apparent that Tim's case is clouded by controversy. Even if you set aside the legalities, everyone can see what's happen to those stuck in the system is wrong!
What is highly commendable, that against all odds, this person has decided to take on the government and fight for the injustice, that has been done to so many. Something, that's certainly not easy to do. Tim and Roy fight for what they believe is right, despite the fact, that this has a negative effect on their lifes! We can all sit here and pretend that everything is fine, but who are we kidding? Many will read this post, maybe even agree, but will not comment due to the fear of consequences. But if everyone does that, we maybe in risk of dictatorship!
@Roy
Just keep doing, what you do best!
13 hours ago
