A Canadian lawyer convicted of fraud in Bermuda has been disbarred by the Law Society of Upper Canada.

In 2005, a jury found Robert Martyn guilty of conspiring to fraudulently obtain Bermudian status, a form of citizenship in the British overseas territory.

Doctored birth and marriage certificates falsely tracing the family’s roots to a man from the north Atlantic island were used to back up an application for the status by Martyn’s father.

Martyn, who had been working in Bermuda on work permits since 1996, was eventually granted the status on the strength of the claim in 2001, although authorities later revoked it after discovering the fraud.

At trial, Martyn’s defence team blamed the lawyer’s father for the fraud, and Martyn has always maintained his innocence, appealing the conviction unsuccessfully all the way to the U.K.’s Privy Council, the court of final appeal for British overseas territories.

At the law society, counsel for Martyn highlighted the fact that the offence was not committed in his capacity as a lawyer and that he had been convicted by a jury rather than a judge. An earlier decision of the panel blocked Martyn from re-litigating his conviction. But Martyn, who now lives in the Bahamas, never appeared in person, and no character evidence was called on his behalf.  

“This panel is of the view that revocation of licence is the only order that we can make. Unfortunately, for whatever reason, no evidence was called by the Lawyer before us in regard to this hearing,” wrote panel chairman Gerald Swaye. ”We are only left with the evidence that was before the trial court in Bermuda as to any mitigating circumstance and we are of the view that it was not sufficient for us to consider suspension of the licence or permission to surrender licence. It was solely the Lawyer’s decision as to whether any evidence would be called on his behalf. . . . He chose not to. As a result, we have no alternative, but to revoke his licence.”

Martyn was also ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the law society.

Canada

Canadian founder of Bodog.com indicted in U.S. illegal gambling case, The Province

'Pierre 'Poutine' responsible for robocalls: court documents, Montreal Gazette

Four men arrested in Quebec in Dutch child-porn case, The Globe and Mail

United States

Alabama's immigration policy heading to court, Reuters

Suspect told police Ohio school killings were random, Reuters

International

Irish referendum, German court ruling add to euro zone uncertainty, Reuters

French top court strikes down genocide bill, Reuters 

It’s a hot property even in what has been a relatively balmy Canadian winter and Canada Goose Inc. intends to protect its highly recognizable brand even if it means a legal battle.

Canada Goose Inc. intends to protect its highly recognizable brand even if it means a legal battle.

For more than 55 years, Canada Goose has built a strong business on the warmth and fashionable look of its jackets, but in a high-profile trademark infringement lawsuit, it claims another company is hijacking its brand. The case is prompting trademark experts to remind companies to shore up the protection of their marks in light of this case and others that are making headlines these days.

In a Jan. 31 court filing, Canada Goose alleges that International Clothiers is misleading Canadians by using “confusingly similar” patches and logos. The International Clothiers coats have been available since 2009.

Canada Goose claims its red, white, and blue logo patch and placement on the left arm of its jackets form a “highly distinctive trademark” that International Clothiers is violating with its Canada Weather Gear and Super Triple Goose products. They want the court to force International Clothiers to stop selling the jackets and, with Canada Goose’s supervision, destroy their remaining stock.

In its claim, Canada Goose says multiple complaints about the alleged infringement went nowhere.

None of the allegations have been proven in court. International Clothiers have 30 days to file a statement of defence.

The lawsuit is similar to other cases including Gap Inc. versus G.A.P Adventures. Although Canada Goose has not yet claimed a specific amount in damages, the Gap battle cost the Canadian adventure travel company $5 million and a four-year legal battle, demonstrating how much trademark infringement can cost a business.

Kathleen Lemieux, a partner in the intellectual property group at Borden Ladner Gervais LLP says companies need to be aware of the opportunities out there for infringers to take advantage.

“If a company is benefiting from your reputation by mimicking your brand look and feel or your products, that can have a direct effect on your bottom line and on the value of the brand you have created,” says Lemieux. “In the Canada Goose case, where the company prides itself on delivering quality, Canadian-made products, the concern is that consumers will confuse the brands and the reputation of Canada Goose will be harmed by being associated with similar-looking garments that may not deliver the same value.”

Canadian businesses building their brands in new markets like China should be particularly careful when it comes to their intellectual property. Ikea and Apple are two companies with big brands that discovered last year they had been cloned in China.

Lemieux notes several steps companies should consider to protect their brand such as registering IP rights in China or other jurisdictions they may consider for growth outside Canada.

“It’s so much cheaper and easier to get protection for your IP assets in the beginning than to try and get them back. It’s so difficult to get any assets back once an infringer has taken over in the Chinese market,” says Lemieux.

The situation that often happens, she says, is that a Canadian business enters into an agreement with a distributor or other partner in China without any trademark rights and that manufacturer or licensee will go out and register the trademark. “All of a sudden it’s difficult to get that mark back,” she says.

To avoid any surprises overseas and to protect a brand here at home, Lemieux recommends Canadian businesses take the following steps:

1.  Conduct searches to clear your brand and trademark before adopting, using and applying for a trademark registration.
2.  Once selected, register your brand name as a trademark and use it. Registration (and use) will serve you well if you ever have to go to court to stop an infringing use.
3.  Online business owners should consider whether setting up online alerts to seek out cases of trademark infringement is a good strategy for their business. This may be the best way of protecting the business’ brand and ensuring that the worst offenders are taken to task.
4.  If you have significant growth plans in mind, consider registering your intellectual property rights in China. A Canadian trademark or patent registration does not provide automatic protection in other jurisdictions, including China.
5.  Most importantly, consult a law firm familiar with IP law to help identify what you should be protecting and guide you through the registration process.

Canada

Via derailment passengers seek to launch class action suit, Ottawa Citizen

Winnipeg man admits to killing in self-defence in alleged homosexual incident, Calgary Herald

B.C. hit-and-run driver gets two years for killing motorcyclist, The Province

United States

Supreme Court rejects states' appeal on Great Lakes carp, Reuters

Bank of America trial returns to NY state court, Reuters

International

Nigerian politician admits to corruption in U.K. court, Reuters

Spanish judge cleared in Franco probe case, Reuters 

While the Ontario government has heralded reforms to streamline the family law system, a new Law Commission of Ontario interim report is calling for additional measures.

(Photo: Shutterstock)

In its interim report on the family law system, the commission emphasizes the need for litigants, particularly self-represented people, to access information on the process. The government, of course, has already been making efforts in that regard through its family law information centres in courthouses. But the report cast some doubt on whether that’s the best strategy.

“Their location at the courthouses raises concerns about their accessibility for users who may find the justice system intimidating,” the report noted. “We recommend an evaluation of the FLICs as the entry point for the family justice system.”

To address the concern, the report recommends creating a basic brochure for distribution at “strategic places,” such as libraries, doctors’ offices, supermarkets, and law firms. In addition, given the plethora of web sites with legal information, the report suggests creating what it says would be a neutral information hub.

At the same time, the commission addressed the need for more comprehensive face-to-face services given that legal clinics typically don’t provide family law services. As a result, it recommends providing some hours of subsidized legal advice to local-income people.

In rural areas with shortages of legal services, it suggests placing legal aid lawyers in community centres or providing subsidies to legal clinics to offer advice on family law.

In total, the commission made 39 recommendations for improving the family law system.

On the subject of alternative dispute resolution, it suggested funding a court-wide system of dispute resolution officers as well as providing legal aid certificates to low-income people who use non-judicial options.

The commission is running consultations on the interim report until April 30 in anticipation of producing a final report later this year.

Canada

Jury selection begins in Tori Stafford murder trial, The Globe and Mail

Doctors won't face lawsuit for alleged negligence in diagnosing HIV, The Province

Trial begins for ex-RCMP officer Kevin Gregson, Ottawa Citizen

United States

Lawyers, voters in NY redistricting suit assemble in federal court, Reuters

American in NYC pipe bomb case likely to face charges, Reuters

International

Ex-judge cleared in Spanish Franco probe case, Reuters

Trademark conflict looming over who discovered NBA star Jeremy Lin, Reuters 

The Parti Québécois tried to make political hay in early February when it jumped on a La Presse story that revealed that 46 of the 180 lawyers with the Montreal-based business law firm BCF had contributed a total of $20,000 to the coffers of Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ), a new right-wing provincial political party led by former PQ cabinet minister and businessman François Legault — and for which BCF co-founder and managing partner Mario Charpentier is in charge of finances.

But things went horribly wrong for the PQ just days later when it was widely reported that 49 lawyers with Fasken Martineau Dumoulin LLP have donated $153,000 since 2003 to the coffers of the left-leaning, sovereignty-promoting PQ — all of them with the firm’s Quebec City and Saguenay offices, which are run by regional associate managing partner Éric Bédard, brother of PQ MNA Stéphane Bédard.

The PQ had used the story about the contribution by BCF’s lawyers to call on the CAQ leader, who does not have a seat in the provincial legislature, to take a public stand on the always tricky question of political party financing, a key platform in the PQ’s program.

“[Our party] believes we must be free of the influence of money and money collectors,” PQ caucus president Raymond Archambault was quoted as saying in a press release on Feb. 2.  “That’s why we are proposing that the maximum limit in political party donations be lowered to $100 per person. We ask [Legault[ to do the honourable thing and support us.”

PQ leaders didn’t see any inconsistency and/or hypocrisy in their position when the donations by Fasken Martineau lawyers became public.

“Over 10 years, that’s only four lawyers a year,” MNA Stéphane Bédard said about the contributions from his brother’s firm. “The CAQ had 40 lawyers or twice as many in only six months.”

For her part, PQ leader Pauline Marois was shocked that anyone would question an individual’s right to “give to the party of their choice.” She added that it would be “worrying” if lawyer Éric Bédard didn’t contribute to his own brother’s political party.

Louis Masson, president of the Barreau du Quebec, did not return calls for comment.

The International Law Office has awarded a whole gamut of Canadian lawyers with its Client Choice Awards.

The awards, which surveys senior corporate counsel only, recognizes winners globally and honours both individuals and law firms for their contribution to the legal profession.

McMillan LLP was selected as Canada’s winning law firm this year. Winning law firms were selected through an ILO subscriber survey of corporate counsel and were assessed for the depth of their team, response time, quality legal advice and billing transparency, among other criteria.

Sander Grieve

Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP partner Sander Grieve was the only Canadian winner in the capital markets category to receive the Client Choice Award 2012 and is the national co-chairman of FMC’s mining group. Apart from practising in public markets finance and mergers-and-acquisitions, he also acts for a wide range of issuers, underwriters, and agents in both international and domestic securities issues. Currently, Grieve focuses on global mining and precious metals in his practice.

“The support of my clients is essential to my business; that they have taken time out to recognize my efforts is the highest professional praise I could hope for,” said Grieve.

Evans, who has worked with FMC since 1999, also was an exclusive Canadian winner this year in the litigation category. Evans’ litigation practice focuses primarily on banking, securities, professional liability, and fraud. He often appears before all levels of court in Canada and practices heavily in auditor’s liability and securities matters.

“This award is particularly meaningful as it reflects the views of my clients,” said Evans. “Strong, time-tested client relationships are the foundation of our success as lawyers. I am honoured to have been recognized by my clients and ILO.”

Mark Evans

The Norton Rose Group was also selected as an ILO Client Choice Award winner in the international category this year. Individually, Charles Hurdon, a partner at Norton Rose Canada LLP, was awarded in the employment category along with six other members of the Norton Rose Group who took home individual prizes globally.

Hurdon specializes in employment and labour law and has experience representing and advising employers in executive employment agreements, executive compensation and executive terminations. He also practices in occupational health and safety and has assisted employers in developing health and safety programs.

Other individual Client Service Award winners across Canada include:

•    Eric Carmona, partner Stikeman Elliott LLP, in the Commercial Property category
•    Roger Taplin, partner McCarthy Tétrault LLP, in the Energy & Natural Resources category
•    Shawn HT Denstedt, partner Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP, in the Environment category
•    Sandra Abitan, partner Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP, in the Insolvency & Restructuring category
•    Marion Bailey-Canham, partner Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP, in the Intellectual Property category
•    Sylvain Cossette, partner Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP, in the M&A category

The London-based ILO selected winners for their client care and quality of service based on client reviews and independent research. Specifically, the award honours lawyers who add significant, real value to their clients’ business in a way that sets them apart from other lawyers in the same market. Lawyers and law firms were also evaluated on their quality of legal advice, communication skills, and use of technology. Winners were chosen from more than 2,000 individual assessments received from corporate counsel in 64 jurisdictions worldwide.

The ILO awards research team also conducted interviews and additional research to establish the shortlist of award winners. Categories for this year’s individual awards included arbitration, banking, corporate tax, public law, and white-collar crime, among others.

Award winners were announced in Canada Feb. 23.

Updated version of story posted at 1 p.m.

Canada

York U law student charged after shots fired in residence building, The Globe and Mail

Hollywood actress given go-ahead to sue B.C. film company, The Province

Bail hearing for driver in fatal collision delayed, at request of lawyer, Montreal Gazette

United States

U.S. appeals court says DNA testing constitutional, Reuters

Obama has yet to make appointment to U.S. appeals court, Reuters

International

Italian court rules against Fiat in union conflict, Reuters

UAE telecom operator to shut down operations in India JV after court cancels licence, Reuters 

A Winnipeg lawyer has been disbarred after admitting he overcharged clients residential school clients to the tune of almost $1 million.

A Law Society of Manitoba panel revoked Howard Tennenhouse’s licence on Tuesday after he pleaded guilty to professional misconduct related to 55 of his more than 100 residential school cases.

Compensation to victims is administered by the Indian Residential Schools Independent Assessment Process, which also typically approves a 15-per-cent fee to lawyers on top of the award. Lawyers can apply to boost their fees by a further 15 per cent, which comes out of the client’s money.

According to an agreed statement of facts filed with the hearing, Tennenhouse billed clients for the full 15 per cent immediately, without waiting for approval from an adjudicator. In some cases, he took his cut even after the additional fees had been disallowed or after telling an adjudicator that he would be taking a smaller amount.

The total amount of money appropriated by Tennenhouse that was either disallowed or over the amount approved so far has reached $950,000, according to the agreed statement of facts.

That law society suspended Tennenhouse in January after he stopped paying back money to victims, a condition that had been placed on his right to continue practising. According to the agreed statement of facts, Tennenhouse was submitting applications on behalf of residential school victims as late as November 2011, despite telling the law society he had had no dealings with IAP claimants.

In addition to his disbarment, Tennenhouse was also ordered to pay $57,000 for the cost of the hearing.

According to the Winnipeg Free Press, Tennenhouse was in defiant mood after receiving his punishment, telling the paper his clients knew what he was doing.

“What I’m upset about is I had to (be) disbarred and slammed in the media as someone who was stealing from the Indians, when that’s not what I did,” Tennenhouse told the Free Press. “These individuals are not as vulnerable or as foolish as the law society seems to think because they are unsophisticated…I still have an excellent reputation on the reserves where I work.”