2018 NLCA 20, 2018 NLCA 20

Gordon Aylward (appellant) v. Law Society of Newfoundland and Labrador (respondent) (17/88) Indexed As: Aylward v. Law Society of Newfoundland and Labrador 2018 NLCA 20 2 C.A.N.L.R. 663 Court of Appeal of Newfoundland and Labrador Welsh and White JJ.A., and Goodridge J. ( ex officio ) April 13, 2018

Summary: The appellant, filed a complaint with the Law Society against two lawyers who were employed by the Law Society as the executive director and the legal director. The Complaints Authorization Committee dismissed the complaint. The appellant appealed unsuccessfully to the Supreme Court Trial Division and now appealed to this Court. Held: Appeal dismissed. The Court: The appeal was dismissed essentially for the reasons of the Supreme Court judge, who did not err. Counsel: Appearing on his own behalf, the appellant; Danial M. Boone Q.C., for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on April 12, 2018 before Welsh and White JJ.A., and Goodridge J. ( ex officio ). The following judgment was delivered on April 13, 2018 by the Court. ______________________________________________________________ The Court: [ 1 ] Gordon Aylward, a member of the Law Society of Newfoundland and Labrador at the relevant time, filed a complaint with the Law Society against two lawyers who were employed by the Law Society as the executive director and the legal director. The Complaints Authorization Committee dismissed the complaint pursuant to

section 45 of the Law Society Act, 1999 , SNL 1999, c. L-9.1. Mr. Aylward was unsuccessful in appealing that decision to the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador (section 45(7) of the Act ). He now appeals to this Court. ______________________________ Leave to appeal to SCC refused, 38228 (February 28, 2019). [ 2 ] The Supreme Court judge assessed the facts related to Mr. Aylward’s complaint within the context of the procedure set out in the Act . He addressed Mr. Aylward’s submissions regarding procedural fairness as well as actual bias and the apprehension of bias.

He concluded that there was no basis on which to set aside the Complaints Authorization Committee’s decision to dismiss the complaint.

[ 3 ] Having read the materials filed and heard submissions from Mr. Aylward and counsel for the Law Society, we are satisfied that the Supreme Court judge did not err. We would dismiss the appeal, essentially for the reasons of the Supreme Court judge. We would order costs to the Law Society under column 3 of the scale of costs pursuant to the Court of Appeal Rules , NLR 30/16, leaving it to the Law Society “to decide whether it should pursue costs, which is within its discretion to exercise” as was done by the Court appealed from (decision of the Supreme Court judge, 2017 NLTD(G) 159, at paragraph 95). Appeal dismissed .