An Ontario Superior Court judge has ordered a lawyer to pay $195,000 in damages after he sexually harassed a vulnerable client, breached his fiduciary duty, violated the Human Rights Code, and defamed her by disclosing confidential information online.
Justice H.J. Williams ruled that J.B., a criminal defence lawyer, exploited his position of trust to proposition his client, L.A., for sexual favours in exchange for legal services. The court found that J.B.’s conduct amounted to “a staggering breach of the trust obligations a lawyer owes to a client.”
Assault with a weapon charge
In May 2022, L.A. was charged with assault with a weapon after throwing a plastic beer pitcher at a man in a bar. Concerned about the impact a conviction might have on her job as a personal support worker and her custody arrangements for her son, she sought legal representation.
After initially contacting J.B., who requested a $4,000 retainer, L.A. decided to attend her first court appearance without his assistance due to financial constraints. She later applied for Legal Aid but was denied. In August 2022, she approached J.B. again to inquire about a payment plan, which he agreed to consider.
Indecent offer via Snapchat
J.B. encouraged L.A. to communicate via Snapchat, a messaging app that automatically deletes messages after 24 hours. Through this platform, J.B. proposed that he would provide legal services in exchange for oral sex every two weeks. Despite L.A.’s refusal and her offer to pay $200 bi-weekly over 24 months, J.B. persisted.
Throughout August 2022, J.B. continued to suggest the exchange of legal services for sexual acts. He sent L.A. a photograph of his genitalia, invited her to his home to consume alcohol and drugs, and expressed that he found the idea of trading oral sex for legal services “hot.”
When L.A. disclosed that she was experiencing extreme mental distress and suicidal thoughts, J.B. suggested that consuming alcohol and drugs and engaging in sexual activities with him would alleviate her stress. He also cautioned her against sharing their communications, stating that doing so could jeopardize her criminal defence. Furthermore, he hinted at his connections with the Crown Attorney, implying he could arrange for her charge to be dismissed.
Conduct reported to police
In September 2022, L.A. reported J.B.’s harassment to a police officer, who advised her to file a complaint and retain new counsel. She subsequently hired a new lawyer who filed a complaint with the Law Society of Ontario (LSO) and arranged for the charge against her to be dismissed within two weeks.
On Nov. 29, 2022, media outlets reported on L.A.’s complaint to the LSO. That same day, J.B. posted a tweet stating, “It’s fake,” and hosted a chat on the social media platform Discord. During the chat, he identified L.A. by name, discussed her criminal charge, and accused her of fabricating the complaint to avoid paying his legal fees. He also disclosed personal information, alleging that she was a drug user, had sent him intimate photographs, and that they had engaged in mutual flirting.
Justice Williams found that J.B.’s actions constituted a breach of fiduciary duty, violations under the Human Rights Code, and defamation. “The defendant’s campaign to exploit the circumstances of this vulnerable young client for his own gratification followed by his public disclosure of her personal circumstances and confidential information amount to a staggering breach of the trust obligations a lawyer owes to a client,” the judge stated.
Breach of fiduciary duty
The court awarded L.A. $75,000 in damages for breach of fiduciary duty. Justice Williams emphasized the sanctity of the lawyer-client relationship, noting that it is “founded on trust” and that such trust allows clients to bring “their most intimate problems and all manner of matters, great or small, to their lawyers.”
The judge compared the case to R.B. v. E.S. (2017), where a plaintiff was awarded $70,000 in damages after her lawyer engaged in unwanted sexual touching. While acknowledging that J.B. did not physically touch L.A., the court found that his persistent propositions and the mental distress caused warranted substantial damages.
Violations of the Human Rights Code
L.A. was awarded $65,000 for violations under Ontario’s Human Rights Code. The court held that J.B. denied her the right to equal treatment without discrimination based on sex, which includes freedom from sexual harassment. Justice Williams stated, “The defendant’s conduct was on the serious end of the scale, particularly given the context of the lawyer-client relationship and the complete trust the plaintiff should have felt she could place in him.”
The damages under the Code serve a different purpose from general damages, aiming to recognize the right to be free from discrimination and the experience of victimization. The judge considered factors such as humiliation, hurt feelings, loss of self-respect, and the seriousness of the offensive treatment in determining the award.
Defamation
For the defamation claim, the court awarded L.A. $30,000. Justice Williams found that J.B.’s statements during the Discord chat met the criteria for defamation: they were published to third parties, referred to L.A., and were defamatory in nature.
The judge noted that J.B.’s allegations—that L.A. was dishonest, a drug user, and had sent him intimate photographs—were serious and damaging to her reputation, especially considering her profession as a personal support worker, which requires trustworthiness.
Punitive damages
An additional $25,000 in punitive damages was awarded to L.A. The court found J.B.’s conduct to be “shocking” and “an offence to the court’s sense of decency,” warranting a punitive sanction. Justice Williams highlighted J.B.’s premeditation, his exploitation of L.A.’s vulnerability, and his disregard for his professional obligations.
“The defendant harmed not only the plaintiff but the reputation of lawyers generally,” the judge stated. “While his misconduct was directed toward the plaintiff, and directly and seriously harmed the plaintiff, its effects will have been felt more widely.”
In determining the amount, the court considered that J.B. is facing related criminal charges and ongoing proceedings with the LSO. The judge referenced the Supreme Court of Canada’s guidance that moderate punitive damages, which carry societal stigma, are generally sufficient.
Justice Williams also awarded L.A. $40,000 in costs on a substantial indemnity basis. The total damages awarded amounted to $195,000, reflecting the court’s recognition of the severity of J.B.’s misconduct and its impact on L.A.
For more information, see Aubin v. Bowie, 2024 ONSC 5688 (CanLII).
