How have courts interpreted the elements of s. 50(1) of the Law Society Act?

However, the licensee relied on the judicial decision in Law Society of Upper Canada v. Tassiopoulos, [2005] O.J. No. 4425, a decision of K.V. Madigan J.P. in the Ontario Court of Justice. In relation to the elements of s. 50(1) of the Law Society Act the Court wrote (at paras. 16 & 17): 16. Both parties agreed that the offences alleged should be characterized as mens rea offences. In other words, to prove its case, the prosecution must prove, beyond a reasonsble doubt, not only the prohibited conduct but also that the prohibited conducted was intentional or deliberate or, at the very least, reckless. 17. Although no caselaw on this particular issue was presented by either, it is reasonable to interpret these offences as mens rea offences and the trial proceed on this premise.