We conclude on the admitted facts that the licensee’s supervision and oversight of his real estate practice was superficial, at best, to non-existent. The question remains whether the licensee’s lack of supervision and concern is so serious as to constitute recklessness or willful blindness. As stated in Law Society of Upper Canada v. Pauline Yat: Recklessness arises where a person is aware of the danger that his or her actions may result in prohibited conduct, but proceeds in the face of that risk. Willful blindness occurs where a person is aware of the need for inquiry, but declines to inquire as he or she does not wish to know. Either a finding of recklessness or willful blindness or a combination is sufficient to find a contravention of Rule 2.02(5) and former Rule 3.[1]
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.