What the Law Society of Ontario isn't telling you about your lawyer
Toronto criminal defence lawyer Andrew Menchynski’s professional profile on the Law Society of Ontario website is spotless.
It lists no current or past regulatory issues and no restrictions on his practice.
What the public can’t see is that since September 2022 Menchynski had been subject to criminal charges for alleged assault, forcible confinement and possession of a weapon, a 12-month peace bond, a regulatory investigation, two Law Society undertakings and an 11-month suspension from his practice.
Menchynski’s licence was quietly reinstated by the Law Society of Ontario (LSO) in January — one day after his former domestic partner (the complainant in his criminal charges) wrote an email to the LSO stating, “I still don’t believe it is safe for the public for this person to practice law.”
What led to the undertakings and suspension, and the reasons for Menchynski’s reinstatement remain a mystery — even to his complainant.
She only learned of Menchynski’s licence reinstatement in February because she checked his profile on the LSO website.
A year after a Law Society of Ontario (LSO) committee issued a report critical of the regulator’s transparency with the public, key details of complaints and investigations involving lawyers and paralegals remain hidden.
While the LSO’s professional regulation committee urged the regulator to change its bylaws to require internal investigations be disclosed when there is a compelling public interest, Menchynski’s case has remained shrouded in secrecy.
For months, the LSO repeatedly declined requests to confirm the status of its internal probe into Menchynski.
An Investigative Journalism Bureau (IJB) review of the LSO’s handling of Menchynski’s case reveals a string of regulatory steps behind the scenes that were never disclosed to the public.
On June 19, the IJB obtained an LSO letter to the complainant confirming that it has now closed its internal investigation into Menchynski with “insufficient evidence…to support further regulatory proceedings.” The letter also confirmed Menchynski entered into an undertaking with the LSO in April — three months after his licence was reinstated — requiring him to meet “certain conditions.”
The conditions of that undertaking — and another he signed in 2023 — were never posted on his public profile because they contain personal health information, LSO officials told reporters.
But following questions from IJB reporters, LSO revealed in a June 20 email that they were suddenly “reassessing” their position and released a copy of the April undertaking with personal health details redacted.
The document details conditions Menchynski must meet to maintain his licence including demonstrating to the LSO that he is not facing any ongoing criminal proceedings and that he hasn’t been charged with or convicted of any offences.
He must also provide confirmation from a regulated health professional that he is not “incapacitated” and show that he is able to meet his professional obligations through “compliance with a continuing course of treatment” or “continuing use of an assistive device” or that he no longer requires either. The “device” is not specified.
If the conditions are not met, the LSO will impose a restriction on Menchynski’s licence, the document says.
Menchynski’s practice conditions in the earlier 2023 undertaking were not disclosed to reporters.
His public profile also does not show that the criminal charges against him were withdrawn and he entered into a 12-month peace bond in August 2023.
The bond required him to stay away from his former intimate partner and not possess weapons.
Menchynski did not directly respond to requests for comment for this story. But in October, his lawyer said in a written statement, “Mr. Menchynski has steadfastly denied the allegations made by the complainant …[and] entered into a peace bond without admitting to the facts that gave rise to the charges.”
The complainant recently said she will not proceed with her LSO complaint. “I do not believe that it will do anything at this point.”
***
Amid an ongoing investigation by the IJB into lawyer sexual and other misconduct, an LSO committee report concluded in May 2024 that the information currently provided to the public “does not ensure transparency or serve the Law Society’s public protection mandate.”
Withholding details about a lawyer’s conduct can have serious ramifications on the safety of clients and “undermine public confidence in the professions,” it reads.
“In the worst imaginable circumstances, there is a risk of harm to clients that might otherwise have been avoided had those clients had access to all relevant information about their lawyer or paralegal.”
In May — a year after the report was received — the LSO approved it in principle, agreeing to greater public disclosure of information including notices of disciplinary hearings and Law Society Tribunal outcomes. But public release of criminal and other charges as well as LSO investigations into its members remains controversial.
Respondents to an LSO consultation on the proposed changes expressed “significant opposition to the proposed recommendations to publish criminal or other charges and findings of guilt on the directory,” reads an LSO report summarizing its findings.
Among the concerns raised were presumption of innocence considerations and the potential for “disproportionate effects on racialized or otherwise marginalized” members.
“These are complex questions that require additional research and deliberation,” reads a May statement.
Fay Faraday, a Toronto lawyer and chair of the LSO’s Discrimination and Harassment Counsel, which reviews complaints from lawyers and the public, says prospective clients deserve transparency when they’re choosing a lawyer to represent them.
“The more information that is easily accessible for a client…to do research on their lawyer before they retain them, the better.”
There is no timeline for a decision from the LSO.
***
Other professionals face far more rigorous public reporting requirements than lawyers.
The province’s 26 health profession colleges (which oversee doctors, dentists, nurses and all licensed health professionals) make public any criminal charges, findings of guilt and conditions. And all professional disciplinary information from regulatory colleges — including findings of professional negligence or malpractice, cautions, mandated training, reprimands, suspensions, revocations and appeals — must also appear on the public registry.
The legislation governing health and teaching professionals also prevents them from having a sexual relationship with their patients and students. Lawyers have no such prohibition with clients.
A former licensed teacher who is now a practicing paralegal in Ontario provides a stark comparison in transparency disclosures.
Stephanie Colangelo, who was a high school teacher in Niagara, pled guilty in November 2020 to sexually luring three students by sending messages “of a sexual nature” including “sexualized photos and videos of herself” and telling them she would engage in sexual activity with them, including intercourse.
At the same time, she filed a paralegal licensing application to the Law Society in which she disclosed she was the subject of a criminal investigation.
Four days later, she pleaded guilty to luring a child to commit sexualexploitation.
The Ontario College of Teachers revoked her teaching licence the following year and posted on her professional profile all of the details of her criminal sentence and court order preventing her from interacting with anyone under the age of 16 unless in the direct company of an adult 30 years or older.
A year later, following a lengthy licensing process with the Law Society, a tribunal found Colangelo of “good character” and awarded her a licence to practice.
Today, her public profile on the LSO website contains no reference to any of the regulatory or disciplinary issues posted on the Ontario College of Teachers website. It is clear.
Colangelo did not respond to requests for comment.
The LSO said in a statement that its current transparency rules do not require the posting of Colangelo’s criminal background.
“The Professional Regulation Committee continues to consider whether changes are required to the information that must be maintained in the register,” the statement reads.
***
Menchynski’s former partner says her experience with the LSO over the last two and a half years has left her feeling tired and frustrated.
She was particularly disturbed by a phone call with the LSO investigator on the case in early January.
“She basically tried to convince me that it is going to be better if I withdraw my complaint,” says the woman, who recalls the investigator asking several times about whether she wanted to “rethink” pursuing her complaint.
The Law Society declined to comment on the details, citing confidentiality.
In the end, the woman confirmed she wanted to continue, but said during the course of the call the investigator “told me it’s gonna take another year if I don’t withdraw my complaint.”
Five months later the investigation was closed.
“Apparently they don’t care anymore,” she says. “I’ve done everything that I can do at this point.”
OTHER CASES
Last year, an IJB investigation examined the details of several Ontario lawyers facing sexual misconduct allegations and how their cases were communicated publicly by the Law Society of Ontario.
There has since been criminal and professional updates on three of the cases below:
Adam Castonguay
Sudbury, Ont., lawyer Adam Castonguay continues to practice as the LSO investigates him for an alleged sexual assault of a former articling student four years ago.
In January 2021, then-articling student, Julie Lamothe, alleged that a senior lawyer at her firm, Castonguay, sexually assaulted her at an office Christmas party.
In March 2025, the Law Society referred Castonguay’s case to a “conduct application” before the Law Society Tribunal after four years of an on-and-off investigation, conditions on his licence and two criminal cases filed by Lamothe and a second former partner. They resulted in an acquittal in September 2023, two peace bonds and a civil suit that settled out of court.
The conduct application will determine if Castonguay has engaged in professional misconduct or “conduct unbecoming” a lawyer licensed by the LSO.
The LSO is examining allegations that Castonguay “sexually assaulted and/or harassed Julie Lamothe, an articling student of the law firm at which he was in a position of authority as the managing partner.”
The LSO is also investigating Castonguay for allegedly breaching conditions imposed by the regulatory body barring him from having contact with Lamothe or visiting her place of work.
Castonguay’s public profile on the LSO website simply indicates his “regulatory history” and “current practice restrictions” are “None.”
It does list an ongoing current regulatory proceeding and directs the public to a separate Law Society Tribunal website, which includes a notice of application alleging Castonguay acted without integrity by “failing to comply with a term of his release order and…being untruthful with the Sudbury police about why he was in the courthouse.”
Castonguay did not respond to a request for comment for this story.
James Bowie
James Bowie, an Ottawa lawyer, was found guilty in a March 2025 court ruling of harassment, extortion and death threats against former client, Leanne Aubin, and another woman whose identity is protected by a publication ban.
Bowie has a lengthy record with the LSO, much of which is hidden from public view.
In November 2022, Aubin went public with her allegations of sexual harassment by Bowie.
She is one of at least six complaints of sexual harassment by clients and colleagues of Bowie.
But there is no record of these investigations on Bowie’s public profile — nor is there any record of the civil and criminal outcomes against him.
Instead, there is a sanitized regulatory history that shows Bowie was suspended by the Law Society in December 2022 after it found he did not cooperate with investigations into his billing practices and allegations of failing to serve clients.
In January 2023, Aubin sued Bowie in a $275,000 civil suit, alleging breach of fiduciary duty, breach of confidence, breach of the human rights code and defamation.
Bowie was charged criminally in April 2023 with making death threats against former client Leanne Aubin, attempting to buy a firearm illegally and two counts of extortion, according to court documents.
A civil court ruling in October 2024 found his conduct towards Aubin was “an offence to the court’s sense of decency.” The judge ordered Bowie to pay Aubin $235,000, summarizing his conduct as “a staggering breach of the trust obligations a lawyer owes to a client.”
He was found guilty in March 2025 of making death threats, harassment and one count of extortion. He is awaiting sentencing, which is set for the end of July.
Bowie was also found in a summary hearing by the Law Society in June 2023 to have “failed to co-operate with an investigation of the Law Society by failing to produce information and documents despite requests from the Law Society’s investigator.”
Bowie did not respond to a request to comment for this story. But in response to questions last fall, he said the allegations against him are “false.”
Toomas Ounapuu
In some cases, public awareness of serious allegations facing lawyers can be kept hidden for years while the LSO investigates.
It took more than five years for the Law Society of Ontario to release its decision regarding sexual misconduct allegations made against Toronto lawyer Toomas Ounapuu in 2019. Throughout that time, there was no reference to the allegations posted publicly on his professional LSO profile.
In February 2025, an LSO tribunal finally issued its findings: Ounapuu sexually harassed a client “by making unwelcome verbal comments that were sexually suggestive and/or degrading,” failed to provide receipts for payments and committed professional misconduct.
Ounapuu was “granted permission to surrender” his licence.
The issue of hidden allegations remaining secret for years is far from unique. The Law Society received 6,478 complaints in 2024. The average duration from the complaint being made to hearing completion was nearly four and a half years.
In interviews with the IJB, Ounapuu has repeatedly denied all allegations including sexual harassment. “I was a lawyer for 52 years,” said a written statement Ounapuu provided through his lawyer.
“This was my first and only time before the Law Society Tribunal. As such, I do not feel that I am in a position to make any comments about the procedures and transparency of the Tribunal.”
The Investigative Journalism Bureau (IJB) at the University of Toronto’s Dalla Lana School of Public Health is a collaborative investigative newsroom supported by Postmedia that partners with academics, researchers and journalists while training the next generation of investigative reporters.
Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.