. The Professional Conduct Committee of the CPAO v. Siddiqi
In The Professional Conduct Committee of the CPAO v. Siddiqi (Ont Div Ct, 2026) the Ontario Divisional Court allowed a CPAO-initiated JR, this brought against a CPAO Appeal Decision that the Registrar readmit a former accountant who "was convicted of three counts of knowingly making a false statement in an application to obtain a small business loan, ...", and consequently had his license revoked.
Here the court cites the 'Armstrong' professional 'good character' factors:
[16] The panel outlined and discussed five factors outlined at para. 29 of Claude Hyman Armstrong v. Law Society of Upper Canada, 2009 ONLSHP 29 that are generally considered in the good character analysis and are often referred to as the “Armstrong factors”:
a. the nature and duration of the misconduct;
b. whether the applicant is remorseful;
c. what rehabilitative efforts, if any, have been taken, and the success of such efforts;
d. the applicant’s conduct since the proven misconduct; and
e. the passage of time since the misconduct.
The author has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this Isthatlegal.ca webpage.
