A councillor’s notice of application for a judicial review includes a number of accusations against the integrity commissioner firm that found he breached the city’s code of conduct.
Ross and McBride LLP, which is representing Ward 3 Coun. Jay Fallis, issued a news release Friday morning, announcing Fallis had called for a judicial review.
It stems from a report by the city’s integrity commissioner, Principles Integrity, that found Fallis breached the code by sharing confidential information about the waterfront development project with legal counsel he had obtained on his own.
City council, at its Oct. 4 meeting, voted unanimously to suspend Fallis’s pay for 45 days — the maximum recommended by Principles Integrity.
The goal of filing for a judicial review is to quash both the integrity commissioner’s report and council’s decision to suspend Fallis’s pay. Fallis is also seeking to be compensated for the cost of the judicial review application.
The notice of application claims Principles Integrity “unreasonably interpreted and applied the legal concept of solicitor-client privilege, including the way in which this privilege applies to other employees in a law firm, when it concluded that the applicant breached the Code of Conduct by sharing confidential information with his lawyers.”
It also alleges the integrity commissioner “unreasonably assessed whether the Code of Conduct had been breached based on its assessment of the applicant’s intentions in seeking independent legal advice, which should reasonably have been considered to be irrelevant.”
Among the many other accusations listed are that Principles Integrity “exceeded its jurisdiction by either deciding or opining on the correctness of the advice of the City Solicitor and whether there were in fact defects in the Request For Proposal documents” and “made contradictory findings of fact, and findings of fact that were not based on the evidence provided to it.”
Fallis’s lawyers also state the integrity commissioner’s report was prepared in “a procedurally unfair manner because the Applicant was not interviewed during the inquiry, contrary to what is stated in the Recommendation Report.”
The notice of application claims Principles Integrity went further than necessary by including in its report “new allegations that were not part of the original complaint during the course of the inquiry.”
It calls for a reversal of council’s decision to suspend Fallis’s pay “because it was based on the unreasonable and procedurally unfair Recommendation Report” and “was arrived at in a procedurally unfair manner because the applicant’s lawyer was prevented from attending the meeting where the sanction was imposed.”
When reached by OrilliaMatters, Fallis would not comment and referred a reporter to his lawyers.
Jeffrey Abrams, co-operator of Principles Integrity, would not speak about the matter other than to say, “We are going to defend (the recommendation report) vigorously and are optimistic.”
Mayor Steve Clarke, who lodged the complaint that led to the integrity commissioner’s investigation, said he was “surprised” Fallis called for a judicial review.
“We went through a process where it was obvious a member of council had shared information with a third party, which was against the code of conduct, and he admitted doing so to council and the integrity commissioner,” Clarke said.
“I’m hoping the decision of the city will be upheld.”
Ashley Wilson, one of the lawyers representing Fallis, would not comment on the matter specifically but provided some details about the judicial review process.
The next step will see the city and Principles Integrity provide a record of proceedings to the Divisional Court. Following that, a date will be set for Fallis’s lawyers to argue their case before the court.
Wilson wouldn’t speculate on how long the process might take, especially because of the effects the COVID-19 pandemic has had on the legal system.
