link href=httpsfonts.googleapis.comcss2family=Playfair+Displayital,wght@0,400;0,700;0,900;1,400;1,700&family=DM+Monowght@400;500&family=Source+Serif+4opsz,wght@8..60,300;8..60,400;8..60,600&display=swap rel=stylesheet
style
.dj-wrap {
--noir #111111;
--rouge #8b2635;
--creme #f7f4ef;
--gris #555555;
--bordure #e8e4dc;
--or #c9a84c;
--bleu #1a2a4a;
--paper #f9f7f4;
background var(--paper);
font-family 'Source Serif 4', Georgia, serif;
font-size 18px;
line-height 1.78;
color var(--noir);
max-width 800px;
margin 0 auto;
padding 0 20px 60px;
box-sizing border-box;
}
.dj-wrap { box-sizing border-box; }
.dj-chapeau {
border-top 3px solid var(--noir);
border-bottom 1px solid var(--bordure);
padding 16px 0 12px;
}
.dj-rubrique {
font-family 'DM Mono', monospace;
font-size 10px;
text-transform uppercase;
letter-spacing .18em;
color var(--rouge);
display inline;
}
.dj-accroche {
font-size 19px;
font-weight 300;
line-height 1.65;
color #333;
border-left 3px solid var(--rouge);
padding-left 20px;
margin 24px 0 28px;
}
.dj-meta {
font-family 'DM Mono', monospace;
font-size 12px;
color var(--gris);
margin-bottom 40px;
padding-bottom 20px;
border-bottom 1px solid var(--bordure);
letter-spacing .03em;
}
.dj-wrap h2 {
font-family 'Playfair Display', Georgia, serif;
font-size clamp(22px, 3vw, 28px);
font-weight 700;
color var(--noir);
margin 56px 0 20px;
padding-bottom 10px;
border-bottom 1px solid var(--bordure);
line-height 1.25;
}
.dj-wrap h3 {
font-family 'Playfair Display', Georgia, serif;
font-size 20px;
font-weight 700;
color var(--noir);
margin 34px 0 14px;
line-height 1.3;
}
.dj-wrap p { margin 0 0 20px; }
.dj-chiffre {
display inline-block;
font-family 'Playfair Display', Georgia, serif;
font-weight 900;
color var(--rouge);
font-size 1.15em;
line-height 1;
}
.dj-citation {
border-left 3px solid var(--or);
margin 36px 0;
padding 18px 24px;
background var(--creme);
}
.dj-citation blockquote {
font-family 'Playfair Display', Georgia, serif;
font-style italic;
font-size 19px;
line-height 1.65;
color var(--noir);
margin 0 0 10px;
}
.dj-citation cite {
font-family 'DM Mono', monospace;
font-size 11px;
color var(--gris);
font-style normal;
letter-spacing .04em;
}
.dj-encadre {
border 1px solid var(--bordure);
border-left 4px solid var(--or);
padding 22px 26px;
margin 32px 0;
background white;
}
.dj-encadre .label {
font-family 'DM Mono', monospace;
font-size 10px;
text-transform uppercase;
letter-spacing .14em;
color var(--or);
display block;
margin-bottom 12px;
}
.dj-encadre p { margin 0 0 10px; font-size 16px; line-height 1.72; }
.dj-encadre plast-child { margin 0; }
.dj-constat {
background var(--bleu);
color white;
padding 32px 30px;
margin 44px 0;
}
.dj-constat .label {
font-family 'DM Mono', monospace;
font-size 10px;
text-transform uppercase;
letter-spacing .16em;
color var(--or);
display block;
margin-bottom 16px;
}
.dj-constat p {
font-size 16px;
line-height 1.78;
color rgba(255,255,255,.88);
margin 0 0 12px;
}
.dj-constat plast-child { margin 0; }
.dj-constat strong { color white; }
.dj-alerte {
background #fff8f8;
border 1px solid #e8c8c8;
border-left 4px solid var(--rouge);
padding 22px 26px;
margin 32px 0;
}
.dj-alerte .label {
font-family 'DM Mono', monospace;
font-size 10px;
text-transform uppercase;
letter-spacing .14em;
color var(--rouge);
display block;
margin-bottom 12px;
}
.dj-alerte p { margin 0 0 10px; font-size 16px; line-height 1.72; }
.dj-alerte plast-child { margin 0; }
.dj-tag-signal { color var(--or); font-weight 700; font-size 12px; font-family 'DM Mono', monospace; white-space nowrap; letter-spacing .05em; }
.dj-exergue {
border-top 2px solid var(--noir);
border-bottom 2px solid var(--noir);
padding 26px 48px;
margin 40px 0;
text-align center;
}
.dj-exergue p {
font-family 'Playfair Display', Georgia, serif;
font-size 22px;
font-style italic;
color var(--noir);
line-height 1.55;
margin-bottom 10px;
}
.dj-exergue cite {
font-family 'DM Mono', monospace;
font-size 11px;
color var(--rouge);
font-style normal;
}
.dj-phrase-finale {
background var(--noir);
padding 34px 36px;
margin 48px 0;
}
.dj-phrase-finale .label {
font-family 'DM Mono', monospace;
font-size 10px;
text-transform uppercase;
letter-spacing .14em;
color rgba(255,255,255,.4);
display block;
margin-bottom 14px;
}
.dj-phrase-finale p {
font-family 'Playfair Display', Georgia, serif;
font-size 20px;
font-style italic;
color rgba(255,255,255,.88);
line-height 1.6;
margin-bottom 12px;
}
.dj-phrase-finale plast-child { margin 0; }
.dj-finale { font-style normal !important; font-weight 700; color var(--or) !important; }
.dj-sep {
text-align center;
color var(--bordure);
font-family 'DM Mono', monospace;
letter-spacing .3em;
margin 44px 0;
font-size 14px;
}
.dj-tableau-comp {
width 100%;
border-collapse collapse;
margin 32px 0;
font-size 15px;
background white;
border 1px solid var(--bordure);
}
.dj-tableau-comp th {
background var(--noir);
color white;
font-family 'DM Mono', monospace;
font-size 10px;
text-transform uppercase;
letter-spacing .1em;
padding 12px 14px;
text-align left;
font-weight 500;
}
.dj-tableau-comp td {
padding 14px;
border-bottom 1px solid var(--bordure);
vertical-align top;
line-height 1.55;
}
.dj-tableau-comp trlast-child td { border-bottom none; }
.dj-tableau-comp tdfirst-child {
font-family 'DM Mono', monospace;
font-size 11px;
color var(--gris);
text-transform uppercase;
letter-spacing .06em;
white-space nowrap;
width 28%;
background var(--creme);
}
.dj-tableau-comp td strong { color var(--rouge); }
.dj-connexes {
border-top 3px solid var(--noir);
padding-top 26px;
margin-bottom 40px;
}
.dj-connexes .label {
font-family 'DM Mono', monospace;
font-size 12px;
text-transform uppercase;
letter-spacing .1em;
color var(--or);
margin-bottom 18px;
display block;
}
.dj-connexes ul { list-style none; padding 0; margin 0; }
.dj-connexes li {
display flex;
gap 16px;
align-items flex-start;
padding 12px 0;
border-bottom 1px solid var(--bordure);
}
.dj-connexes lilast-child { border-bottom none; }
.dj-connexes .cat {
font-family 'DM Mono', monospace;
font-size 10px;
color var(--or);
text-transform uppercase;
letter-spacing .06em;
min-width 150px;
padding-top 3px;
flex-shrink 0;
}
.dj-connexes a {
font-family 'Playfair Display', Georgia, serif;
font-size 16px;
font-weight 700;
color var(--noir);
text-decoration none;
line-height 1.4;
}
.dj-sources {
font-family 'DM Mono', monospace;
font-size 11px;
color var(--gris);
border-top 1px solid var(--bordure);
padding-top 20px;
margin-top 48px;
line-height 1.85;
}
.dj-document-dispo {
font-family 'DM Mono', monospace;
font-size 12px;
color var(--gris);
text-align center;
padding 16px 20px;
margin 40px 0 36px;
border-top 1px solid var(--bordure);
border-bottom 1px solid var(--bordure);
letter-spacing .04em;
}
.dj-document-dispo strong {
color var(--rouge);
letter-spacing .06em;
}
@media (max-width 600px) {
.dj-wrap { padding 0 14px 40px; }
.dj-exergue { padding 22px 18px; }
.dj-phrase-finale { padding 26px 20px; }
.dj-connexes .cat { min-width 100px; }
.dj-tableau-comp tdfirst-child { width 38%; font-size 10px; }
.dj-tableau-comp td { padding 10px; font-size 14px; }
}
style
div class=dj-wrap
div class=dj-chapeau
span class=dj-rubriqueCourt news · Professional discipline · Quebec Bar · Comparative analysis · April 2026span
div
p class=dj-accrocheTwo disbarment notices signed three days apart by the executive director of the Quebec Bar. On one side, a lawyer who stopped responding — to his client, to opposing counsel, to the assistant syndic, to the bailiff sent to reach him. On the other, a lawyer who used span class=dj-chiffre$39,788.20span in taxes belonging to the government for something other than remitting them. The first gets nine months. The second, thirty days. At first glance, the math offends common sense. In reality, it illustrates with striking clarity the logic proper to disciplinary law — which is neither that of criminal law nor that of popular morality.p
div class=dj-metaBy Maxime Gagné · Justice-Quebec.ca · April 2026div
pOn April 13, 2026, Me Catherine Ouimet, executive director of the Quebec Bar, signed disbarment notice no. 06-25-03538 concerning Me Pierre-Hugues Miller. Three days earlier, on April 10, she had signed notice no. 06-25-03632 concerning Me Guy Bernard. Two sober documents, drafted in the impeccable administrative language of professional orders. Two lawyers whose names are now recorded somewhere other than on the Roll of the Order.p
pTaken in isolation, each of these notices tells a story. Placed side by side, they tell a third — that of the mechanism by which a self-regulated profession decides what it tolerates, what it sanctions, and above all, how it sanctions.p
p style=font-family 'DM Mono', monospace; font-size 13px; color var(--gris); border-left 2px solid var(--or); padding-left 14px; margin 24px 0 28px;strong style=color var(--rouge);Note —strong Both full disbarment notices issued by the Quebec Bar are available for download at the bottom of this article.p
div class=dj-sep✦ ✦ ✦div
h2I. The Miller File Four Silences, Nine Monthsh2
pMe Pierre-Hugues Miller (member no. 258248-1) practised law in the judicial districts of Longueuil and Montreal. The disbarment notice concerning him sets out a fragmented timeline the offences were committed in Longueuil between on or about September 18, 2023, and on or about September 24, 2024, then between on or about October 30, 2024, and on or about December 20, 2024. Between those two windows, Miller was administratively struck from the Roll of the Order — then reinstated — then struck again.p
pOn January 21, 2026, the Disciplinary Council of the Quebec Bar found him guilty on all four counts. On March 12, 2026, it imposed the penalties. The disbarment took effect on March 27.p
div class=dj-encadre
span class=labelFile 06-25-03538 — The Four Countsspan
pspan class=dj-tag-signalCOUNT 1 —span strongFailure to return his client's complete filestrong, in relation to matters before the Superior Court and the Court of Appeal, despite the client's requests. emSection 53 of the Code of Professional Conduct of Lawyers.em Penalty four months of disbarment.p
pspan class=dj-tag-signalCOUNT 2 —span strongBreach of duties of cooperation and collaboration toward a fellow lawyerstrong, by failing to respond to several communications regarding his client's file. emSection 132 of the Code of Professional Conduct of Lawyers.em Penalty six months.p
pspan class=dj-tag-signalCOUNT 3 —span strongFailure to respond to correspondence from an assistant syndic.strong emSection 135 of the Code of Professional Conduct of Lawyers.em Penalty strongnine monthsstrong — the most severe.p
pspan class=dj-tag-signalCOUNT 4 —span strongFailure to respond to communications from a bailiffstrong who had to personally serve him with a letter signed by an assistant syndic. emSection 59.2 of the Professional Code.em Penalty six months.p
div
pSince the four periods of disbarment run concurrently, the effective sanction is strongnine monthsstrong — the longest of the four.p
pCount 3 is the heaviest. This is not by chance — it is a signature. In Quebec disciplinary law, failure to respond to the syndic is almost systematically punished more severely than the underlying misconduct that triggered the investigation. The logic is relentless a self-regulated profession cannot function if its members stop responding to the authority that supervises them. No response, no investigation. No investigation, no public protection.p
div class=dj-citation
blockquoteFailed to respond to correspondence from an assistant syndic, thereby contravening section 135 of the emCode of Professional Conduct of Lawyersem.blockquote
cite— Count 3, disbarment notice, file 06-25-03538cite
div
pThere is something particularly telling about Count 4. The assistant syndic, after her written correspondence went unanswered, mandated a bailiff to personally serve a letter. The lawyer did not respond to the bailiff either. This goes beyond mere delay or oversight it is an active refusal to acknowledge the regulator. The Disciplinary Council took note of this methodical obstruction.p
div class=dj-sep✦ ✦ ✦div
h2II. The Bernard File One Count, Five Years, Nearly $40,000h2
pMe Guy Bernard (member no. 248046-8) practised in the districts of Quebec City and Charlevoix. A single count appears on his disbarment notice — but that count covers a continuous five-year period from January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2023.p
div class=dj-citation
blockquoteUsed for other purposes the sum of $39,788.20, which had been entrusted to him in the exercise of his profession by his clients for the purpose of remitting the goods and services tax (GST) and the Quebec sales tax (QST), thereby contravening section 59.2 of the emProfessional Codeem.blockquote
cite— Sole count, disbarment notice, file 06-25-03632cite
div
pOn April 2, 2026, the Disciplinary Council found him guilty. On the same day, it imposed the sanction thirty days of disbarment, effective April 8.p
pThree elements deserve closer attention.p
h3One. The money isn't the clients'. It isn't the lawyer's. It belongs to the government.h3
pWhen a lawyer bills a client $1,000 in fees, he is in fact asking for $1,149.75 — $50 of federal GST (5%) and $99.75 of provincial QST (9.975%). Those $149.75 do not pass through his personal assets they are collected on behalf of the federal and Quebec governments, and must be remitted at regular intervals to both tax authorities. The lawyer acts as a mandatary — a mere intermediary responsible for transferring funds that do not belong to him.p
pUsing those sums for other purposes — to pay office rent, settle a personal debt, fund the daily operations of a practice — means dipping into public funds. This is not a bookkeeping miscalculation. Legally, it amounts to converting a government credit line into private cash flow, without authorization.p
h3Two. The length of the offence — five years — is not incidental.h3
pThis is not a one-off episode, a temporary cash crunch, or a year-end accounting trick. For sixty consecutive months, the lawyer collected taxes intended for the government and used them elsewhere. The cumulative amount — $39,788.20 — is not astronomical in absolute terms, but its distribution over time speaks volumes we are looking at systemic behaviour, not an accident.p
h3Three. The legal vehicle used is section 59.2.h3
pThe Disciplinary Council did not sanction Me Bernard for misappropriation of funds in the strict sense, nor for breach of the specific accounting obligations imposed by Bar regulations on trust accounts. It relied on section 59.2 of the emProfessional Codeem — the broadest provision in the disciplinary regime, which sanctions any act derogatory to the honour or dignity of the profession. This is a qualification choice worth noting it allows for a more flexible sanction, more easily adjustable based on mitigating circumstances.p
div class=dj-sep✦ ✦ ✦div
h2III. Nine Months vs. Thirty Days The Disciplinary Council's Actual Calculationh2
pThe contrast in sanctions — span class=dj-chiffre9 monthsspan on one side, span class=dj-chiffre30 daysspan on the other — has everything to offend common sense. Misappropriation of public funds, intuition tells us, should weigh more heavily than administrative silence. Yet the Disciplinary Council's hierarchy inverts this. Whyp
pThe answer lies in a principle established by the Quebec Court of Appeal as early as 2003 and constantly reaffirmed by disciplinary case law stronga disciplinary sanction does not aim to punish the person at fault, but to protect the public, deter recidivism, ensure exemplarity toward other members of the profession, and preserve the right of the professional to practise his trade when that remains possible.strong These four objectives — protection, deterrence, exemplarity, right to practise — form the analytical grid that no disciplinary council can avoid.p
table class=dj-tableau-comp
thead
tr
thCriterionth
thMiller File (9 months)th
thBernard File (30 days)th
tr
thead
tbody
tr
tdNumber of countstd
tdFour distinct counts, concurrent sanctionstd
tdA single counttd
tr
tr
tdNature of the heaviest offencetd
tdFailure to respond to the syndic — direct attack on the regulatory mechanismtd
tdUse for other purposes of sums owed to the governmenttd
tr
tr
tdObstruction of the regulatortd
tdPresent and repeated — letters ignored, bailiff ignoredtd
tdNot mentioned in the noticetd
tr
tr
tdFinancial amount at staketd
tdNot specified — file withheld from successor counseltd
tdstrong$39,788.20strongtd
tr
tr
tdDuration of the offencetd
tdAbout 14 cumulative months, fragmentedtd
tdFive consecutive yearstd
tr
tr
tdLegal basistd
tdSs. 53, 132, 135 Code of Prof. Conduct + 59.2 Prof. Codetd
tdS. 59.2 Prof. Code onlytd
tr
tr
tdDelay guilt → sanctiontd
td~7 weeks (January 21 → March 12, 2026)td
tdSame day (April 2, 2026)td
tr
tbody
table
pThe table reveals what the two notices, read in isolation, do not say the Bernard file was handled emveryem quickly. Guilt and sanction on the same day — the hallmark of a hearing by guilty plea, likely accompanied by a joint submission on sanction from both parties (the syndic and the respondent lawyer).p
div class=dj-encadre
span class=labelThe weight of joint submissions — Anthony-Cook (2016)span
pSince the Supreme Court of Canada's ruling in emR. v. Anthony-Cookem (2016), when the parties submit a joint sanction recommendation, the disciplinary tribunal — like the criminal court — can only reject it if it is emcontrary to the public interestem. This threshold is deliberately very high. A sanction appearing merely lenient is not enough.p
pIn concrete terms if Me Bernard acknowledged his fault at the earliest stages, cooperated with the syndic, reimbursed the misappropriated sums, and negotiated a sanction with the Syndic's Office, the parties' joint recommendation for thirty days carried considerable weight — even if the sanction seems small relative to $40,000. The public notice does not confirm this hypothesis, but the file's lightning-fast timeline makes it plausible.p
div
pConversely, the Miller file bears all the hallmarks of a contested case — or at least one not simplified by the respondent's cooperation. Seven weeks passed between the finding of guilt and the imposition of sanction — a classic delay when the parties make separate, sometimes divergent, submissions on the appropriate sanction.p
div class=dj-exergue
pThe silence opposed to the regulator is more serious than the fault that triggered its investigation. This is not a moral inversion — it is a functional hierarchy.p
cite— Justice-Quebec.cacite
div
div class=dj-sep✦ ✦ ✦div
h2IV. A Recent Precedent That Illuminates the Scaleh2
pThe Miller file is not isolated. In March 2026 — just weeks before Miller's disbarment — the Quebec Bar published another disbarment notice whose structure bears a striking resemblance.p
pMe Soudy Bakary (member no. 307494-3), an immigration lawyer practising in Montreal, was disbarred for four months on January 13, 2026. Three counts were upheld against him negligence toward a client (s. 20 of the Code of Professional Conduct) and, on two occasions, failure to respond to correspondence from an assistant syndic (s. 135). The periods of disbarment — four months on each count — were served concurrently.p
pThe Bakary case even gave rise to an appeal before the Professions Tribunal, which the lawyer attempted to file on his own. The appeal was dismissed on a procedural defect service by bailiff had not been properly effected.p
div class=dj-alerte
span class=labelThe emerging benchmarkspan
pPlaced side by side, the Bakary (four months, January 2026) and Miller (nine months, March 2026) files suggest an implicit benchmark for failure to respond to the syndic a few months of disbarment when the breach is isolated and accompanied by negligence toward the client; up to nine months when it is accompanied by repeated obstruction — toward a fellow lawyer, then toward the syndic, then toward a bailiff.p
pThe difference between four and nine months rests less on the nature of the breaches than on their accumulation. Miller multiplied the walls of silence. Bakary had built only one.p
div
div class=dj-sep✦ ✦ ✦div
h2V. What These Two Files Say About the Professionh2
div class=dj-constat
span class=labelSummary — Quebec Bar, April 2026span
pstrongMe Pierre-Hugues Millerstrong · File 06-25-03538 · Member no. 258248-1 · Districts of Longueuil and Montreal · 4 counts · Found guilty on January 21, 2026 · Sanctions imposed on March 12, 2026 · strong9 months of disbarmentstrong effective March 27, 2026.p
pstrongMe Guy Bernardstrong · File 06-25-03632 · Member no. 248046-8 · Districts of Quebec City and Charlevoix · 1 count · Found guilty and sanctioned on April 2, 2026 · strong30 days of disbarmentstrong effective April 8, 2026 · Amount at stake strong$39,788.20strong.p
pBoth notices published pursuant to section 64.1 of the emAct respecting the Barreau du Québecem and sections 156 and 180 of the emProfessional Codeem · Signatory Me Catherine Ouimet, lawyer, MBA, executive director of the Quebec Bar.p
div
div class=dj-encadre
span class=labelFour takeaways for the publicspan
pspan class=dj-tag-signalSIGNAL 1 —span strongThe Roll of the Order is public and free to consult.strong Before entrusting a mandate to a lawyer, anyone can check at barreau.qc.ca whether that lawyer is registered, disbarred, or has been the subject of recent disciplinary sanctions. This simple reflex could save you years of litigation.p
pspan class=dj-tag-signalSIGNAL 2 —span strongA disbarment is not a criminal record.strong The disciplinary and criminal regimes are distinct and can overlap. A lawyer disbarred by his order may in parallel face — or not face — criminal or tax prosecution. Public notices say nothing about what happens elsewhere.p
pspan class=dj-tag-signalSIGNAL 3 —span strongTaxes collected by a professional are not his money.strong They belong to the government from the moment they are collected. The professional is merely their mandatary. Misappropriating them, even temporarily, constitutes a breach of the honour and dignity of the profession.p
pspan class=dj-tag-signalSIGNAL 4 —span strongFailing to respond to the syndic is more serious than the fault under investigation.strong This is the structural principle of the Miller file. A lawyer who misses a deadline, neglects a step, or angers a client commits a fault. A lawyer who, on top of that, refuses to respond to the order questioning him commits the most serious fault disciplinary law recognizes — because it deprives the public of the very protection the profession is supposed to offer.p
div
div class=dj-sep✦ ✦ ✦div
h2VI. Questions the Public Notices Don't Answerh2
pA disbarment notice is a short document. It states the counts, the sanction, the effective date. It tells neither the human circumstances, nor the legal debates, nor the submissions of the parties. To access those, one must consult the full decisions of the Disciplinary Council, published separately on the Bar's website, on CanLII, or on the SOQUIJ platform.p
pSeveral questions therefore remain open in both files, and only reading the full decisions would allow them to be answeredp
div class=dj-encadre
span class=labelWhat we still don't knowspan
pstrongIn the Miller file —strong What was the context of the client whose file was not returned Was it a criminal, civil, or family matter Did the lawyer invoke personal or medical circumstances Did the client lose rights because the file was not obtained in time Did Miller have disciplinary antecedents other than the administrative disbarments mentionedp
pstrongIn the Bernard file —strong Were the GST and QST sums reimbursed before the hearing Had Bernard already been the subject of a tax investigation Did he cooperate with the syndic from the outset What mitigating factors did the Council retain to justify a sanction as short as thirty days Was the sanction recommendation joint, or contestedp
div
pThose answers lie in the full decisions. Justice-Quebec.ca will track them and publish in-depth analyses as soon as they go officially online.p
div class=dj-sep✦ ✦ ✦div
div class=dj-phrase-finale
span class=labelAnalysis — Justice-Quebec.ca — By Maxime Gagné — April 2026span
pTwo lawyers. Two faults of very different natures. Two sanctions whose gap — nine months versus thirty days — seems to defy moral intuition, but obeys a rigorous logic. The legal profession does not primarily sanction what shocks the public most; it primarily sanctions what puts itself at risk.p
pWhat the Disciplinary Council protects first is not individual clients. It is the Bar's capacity to supervise its own members. A lawyer who misappropriates $40,000 but responds to the syndic, acknowledges, reimburses, and negotiates allows the system to work. A lawyer who walls himself in silence disables it.p
p class=dj-finaleSelf-regulation is not a privilege. It is a promise made to the public — and that promise, if it is to survive, must first defend itself.p
div
div class=dj-document-dispo
strong↓ FULL DISBARMENT NOTICES AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD BELOW ↓strongbr
Files 06-25-03538 (Miller) and 06-25-03632 (Bernard) — Quebec Bar
div
div class=dj-connexes
span class=labelAlso on Justice-Quebec.caspan
ul
li
span class=catCitizen recoursespan
a href=httpswww.justice-quebec.caporter-plainte-contre-un-avocat target=_blank rel=noopenerFiling a complaint against a lawyer — how to petition the Bar's syndica
li
li
span class=catCompensationspan
a href=httpswww.justice-quebec.caerreur-d-avocat-comment-etre-indemnise target=_blank rel=noopenerLawyer error how to be compensateda
li
li
span class=catProfessional disciplinespan
a href=httpswww.justice-quebec.ca3055204_me-soudy-bakary-radie-du-barreau-du-quebec-pour-quatre-mois-negligence-envers-un-client-et-defaut-de-repondre-au-syndic target=_blank rel=noopenerMe Soudy Bakary disbarred for four months — negligence and failure to respond to the syndica
li
li
span class=catInvestigationsspan
a href=httpswww.justice-quebec.cadossiers-d-enquete target=_blank rel=noopenerInvestigation files — Justice-Quebec.ca reportinga
li
li
span class=catTestimonialsspan
a href=httpswww.justice-quebec.cadossiers-citoyens-et-temoignages target=_blank rel=noopenerCitizen files and testimonialsa
li
ul
div
div class=dj-sources
strongPrimary sourcesstrongbr
emDisbarment notice — Me Pierre-Hugues Millerem · File 06-25-03538 · Quebec Bar · Montreal, April 13, 2026 · Signed by Catherine Ouimet, lawyer, MBA, executive directorbr
emDisbarment notice — Me Guy Bernardem · File 06-25-03632 · Quebec Bar · Montreal, April 10, 2026 · Signed by Catherine Ouimet, lawyer, MBA, executive directorbrbr
strongSecondary sources and case lawstrongbr
Disbarment notice — Me Soudy Bakary · File 06-24-03400 · Quebec Bar · March 6, 2026br
emR. v. Anthony-Cookem, 2016 SCC 43 (framework for joint submissions on sentencing)br
Quebec Court of Appeal, 2003 (criteria for imposing disciplinary sanctions public protection, deterrence, exemplarity, right to practise)brbr
strongLegal referencesstrong
emCode of Professional Conduct of Lawyersem, CQLR c. B-1, r. 3.1, ss. 53, 132, 135 ·
emProfessional Codeem, CQLR c. C-26, ss. 59.2, 156, 158, 180 ·
emAct respecting the Barreau du Québecem, CQLR c. B-1, s. 64.1brbr
emThis article is an editorial analysis based on public disbarment notices issued by the Quebec Bar, supplemented by a review of disciplinary case law and relevant rulings of the Supreme Court of Canada and the Quebec Court of Appeal. Justice-Quebec.ca is an independent citizen platform. This article does not constitute legal advice. The author is not a lawyer. Hypotheses regarding factors that may have influenced the sanctions — notably the possible existence of a joint submission in the Bernard file — are presented as such and cannot substitute for the official reasons of the Disciplinary Council, which appear in the full disciplinary decisions published separately on the Bar's website, CanLII, and SOQUIJ.em
div
div
Ajouter un commentaire
Commentaires