What are the consequences of admitting misconduct and misappropriation?

The admitted misconduct in this case is extremely serious and pervasive. In addition, the finding of misappropriation makes this a case of proven dishonesty, which gives rise to a presumptive penalty of revocation: Law Society of Upper Canada v. Fine.[2] Proven dishonesty must almost invariably lead to loss of the licence to practise law.

In Law Society of Ontario v. Kwok, I summarized this jurisprudence as follows: In cases involving dishonesty or lack of integrity, like this one, revocation is the presumptive penalty unless there are exceptional circumstances; see Law Society of Upper Canada v. Mucha. To rise to the level of exceptional circumstances, factors “must rise to a level where it would be obvious to other members of the profession, and to the public, that the underlying circumstances of the individual clearly obviated the need to provide reassurance to them of the integrity of the profession.”[3]