Does the Law Society of BC have an obligation to uphold and protect the public interest in the administration of justice?

In Law Society of BC v. Hill, 2011 LSBC 16, the hearing panel commented at paragraph 3 that: It is neither our function nor our purpose to punish anyone. The primary object of proceedings such as these is to discharge the Law Society’s statutory obligation, set out in section 3 of the Legal Profession Act, to uphold and protect the public interest in the administration of justice. Our task is to decide upon a sanction or sanctions that, in our opinion, is best calculated to protect the public, maintain high professional standards and preserve public confidence in the legal profession.

A non-exhaustive list of factors to be considered in assessing sanction is set out in the 1999 decision in Law Society of BC v. Ogilvie, 1999 LSBC 17, as follows: (a) the nature and gravity of the conduct proven; (b) the age and experience of the respondent; (c) the previous character of the respondent, including details of prior discipline; (d) the impact upon the victim; (e) the advantage gained, or to be gained, by the respondent; (f) the number of times the offending conduct occurred; (g) whether the respondent has acknowledged the misconduct and taken steps to disclose and redress the wrong and the presence or absence of other mitigating circumstances; (h) the possibility of remediating or rehabilitating the respondent; (i) the impact upon the respondent of criminal or other sanctions or penalties; (j) the impact of the proposed penalty on the respondent; (k) the need for specific and general deterrence; (l) the need to ensure the public’s confidence in the integrity of the profession; and (m) the range of penalties imposed in similar cases.