Legal Writing Assignment: Memorandum of Fact and Law on Kelvin's Case

This memorandum of fact and law analyzes Kelvin's case concerning his application for a good character amendment before the Law Society of Ontario (LSO). Kelvin, a recent graduate of a paralegal program, faced accusations of breaching the Academic Integrity Policy twice. The memo examines the relevant legal framework, including sections 27, 43, and 44 of the Law Society Act, and the good character requirement for paralegals. It discusses the implications of Kelvin's past misconduct, referencing cases like R. v. Gladue and Olowolafe v. Law Society of Ontario. The analysis explores whether Kelvin's past actions, including plagiarism and academic dishonesty, should disqualify him from obtaining a license, considering his punishments and the opportunity to demonstrate rehabilitation. The memo concludes that Kelvin could potentially succeed if he can present his case effectively to the LSO, highlighting his efforts to rectify his past mistakes and demonstrating his suitability to practice law.

Running head: LEGAL WRITING & RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS LAW
LEGAL WRITING & RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS LAW
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1LEGAL WRITING & RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS LAW
MEMORANDUM OF FACT AND LAW
TO: (Need to be filled by student)
FROM: (Need to be filled by student)
COURSE: (Need to be filled by student)
DATE: (Need to be filled by student)
RE: Kelvin’s case on good character
________________________________________________________________________
Whether Kelvin can be successful in his good character amendment suit in the present case
irrespective of the fact that he did not do well in his Paralegal Program in Solomon College
accredited by Law Society of Ontario and held guilty twice for the breach of violating
Solomon’s Academic Integrity Policy?
No, Kelvin's application for a good character amendment doesn't need to be rejected by the
LSO.
Facts:
Kelvin has recently completed his graduate paralegal program from Solomon’s College
which is recognized by the Law Society of Ontario. It can be seen from the fact of the case
that Kelvin has been found guilty of breaching the Academic Integrity Policy of the Solomon
College twice. It has been seen that, during the first time, Susan Sharpe, who was the
professor of Kelvin on the subjects of Tort and Contract, alleged that Kelvin has submitted
someone else's task in one of his assignments. The professor specifically alleged that Kelvin
has copied the work of a former student named Marsha Brayden, who has been graduated the
same paralegal program from Solomon College in the previous years. In a conference with
the professor, Kelvin admitted that Marsha was his cousin and he took the assignment from
Marsha and submitted the same to the College. On that occasion, as a punishment, Kelvin
was asked to complete an Academic Integrity Remediation Course and further received a
written warning. Subsequently, on a second occasion and during the third semester, Ethan
Hawk, who was the professor of ethics and Professional Practice, found out that, Kelvin has
plagiarized the copy of another student and therefore alleged that he has breached the
Academic Integrity Policy of the College. Kelvin in his defense said that he did not copy but

2LEGAL WRITING & RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS LAW
he gave his assignment to another student to help him out and that student might have copied
his assignment. On such occasion, Kelvin got a zero grade in his assignment, which
eventually leads him to flunk the semester and he was forced to wait a full year to again take
the course as it only scheduled for once in a year. Though for the second time he passed.
After completing the entire requirement of the course, when Kelvin was practicing at that
time his boss Shel Silverstone, who knew about his incident in college, asked him to get a
character certificate which he did not get as most of the professors has refused to give him the
same referring his conduct on Solomon. However, during another occasion in 2019, when
Kelvin submitted his application in the Law Society of Ontario to get the license to practice
as a paralegal, he eventually referred the matter of his first misconduct incident in college,
upon which Law Society of Ontario asked for further clarification. At this point, Kelvin got
scared that all his misconduct might get disclosed before the LSO. Thereby he by stating his
reasons behind such misconduct filed for a good character amendment before LSO for the
further statement about his second misconduct.
Law:
In this case, the legal guidelines state out in sections 27, 43 and 44 of the Law Society Act,
R.S.O. 1990, c. L.8 has been discussed in this case.
Discussion:
It has been held that under the Law Society Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. L.8, good character to
determine the license of a paralegal is an important aspect as it is intended to provide
protection to the public and to further ensure a high ethical standard for the professions by
showing that elected paralegals have respect for the rule of law and further for the principles
of administration of justice and they know how to conduct themselves with honesty and
integrity1. Therefore, when an applicant select one or more good character review question
his or her application is judged on the good character review point. The Law society doesn't
need to cancel the application on good character questions. Moreover under section 272, it
cannot refuse an application for the license after a hearing by the Hearing Division.
Therefore, it determines the application under section 43 and 443 of the same Act to
determine the level of the misconduct that happened by the applicant. In the case of R. v.
Gladue4, the supreme court held that to consider the history of an appellant before granting
any decision. The same principle is followed by LSO before deciding a case on good
character. Furthermore, in the case of Olowolafe v. Law Society of Ontario5, the court held
that people do make mistake so a court of law must give them a chance to rectify their
mistake.
Therefore, Kelvin might refer the fact that he already got punishment for his alleged
misconducts from the university's part and therefore, punishing her more on such matters will
ruin her career as well as he will lose the opportunity to serve the society.
Conclusion:
Therefore, it can be concluded that Kelvin can get a good character certificate by LSO if he
can present his case by showing facts and statements about his innocence misconducts of the
past and ask for a chance to do justice with his profession.
1
2
3
4
5

3LEGAL WRITING & RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS LAW
Reference:
"Paralegal Rules of Conduct | Law Society of Ontario", (2020), online: Lsoca
<https://lso.ca/about-lso/legislation-rules/paralegal-rules-of-conduct>.
Lsoca. "Good Character Requirement | Law Society of Ontario", online: Lsoca
<https://lso.ca/becoming-licensed/lawyer-licensing-process/good-character-
requirement>.
Olowolafe v. Law Society of Ontario, 2019 ONLSTH 155.
Ontarioca. "Law Document English View", (2018), online: Ontarioca
<https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90l08#BK38>.
R v Gladue [1999] 1 S.C.R. 688