As said in Law Society of Ontario v. David, 2021 ONLSTA 5 at para. 43: [T]he balance of convenience engages a “myriad of considerations” which do not fall neatly into the first two criteria. Most prominently, the panel must consider protection of the public, involving an evaluation of whether the public would be at risk of the applicant committing further acts of misconduct if the stay were granted. The panel must also consider whether public confidence in the administration of justice and the professions’ ability to self-regulate would be undermined if a stay were granted. Harm to third parties (such as clients) is also a relevant consideration.
"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.