Law Society orders Wang to pay $35,252 in costs
2025-11-14 19:29 ET - Street Wire
Not available.
© 2026 Canjex Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved.
Reader Comments - Comments are open to paying subscribers of Stockwatch and unmoderated,
although libelous remarks, obscene language and impersonations may be deleted.
Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Stockwatch.
For information regarding Canadian libel law, please view the
University of Ottawa's FAQ regarding Defamation and SLAPPs.
"The case marks the first sanction against Mr. Wang, who has been a lawyer in B.C. since 1999. "
https://www.lawsociety.bc.ca/lsbc/apps/hearings/viewreport.cfm?hearing_id=1454
2020 LSBC 59
Decision issued: December 7, 2020
Citation issued: November 4, 2020
THE LAW SOCIETY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
In the matter of the Legal Profession Act, SBC 1998, c. 9
and a hearing concerning
NEAL BURTON WANG
RESPONDENT
[4] The Respondent has not filed a proper amended application with a proper
evidentiary basis. In fact, he has, again, failed to provide any indication
whatsoever of the “extraordinary circumstances” required by the Rule that would
allow me to exercise my jurisdiction to order anonymous publication of the
Citation. The Respondent has chosen to re-argue the procedural issues he raised in
his original application. As a result, there is no evidence upon which I can exercise
my discretion, and I am dismissing this application.
Posted by halcrow at 2025-11-15 20:20
"The case marks the first sanction against Mr. Wang, who has been a lawyer in B.C. since 1999. "
https://www.lawsociety.bc.ca/lsbc/apps/hearings/viewreport.cfm?hearing_id=1454
2020 LSBC 59
Decision issued: December 7, 2020
Citation issued: November 4, 2020
THE LAW SOCIETY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
In the matter of the Legal Profession Act, SBC 1998, c. 9
and a hearing concerning
NEAL BURTON WANG
RESPONDENT
[4] The Respondent has not filed a proper amended application with a proper
evidentiary basis. In fact, he has, again, failed to provide any indication
whatsoever of the “extraordinary circumstances” required by the Rule that would
allow me to exercise my jurisdiction to order anonymous publication of the
Citation. The Respondent has chosen to re-argue the procedural issues he raised in his original application. As a result, there is no evidence upon which I can exercise my discretion, and I am dismissing this application.
Posted by halcrow at 2025-11-15 20:21
Meanwhile some old bullshit artist moustached lawyer who claimed he was part of a committee to reform certain law three that shot out the door to swindle someone in BC, then a lawyer represented him who became a judge, scumbag South Africans moving to BC with their bribes
Posted by Oh at 2025-11-16 17:56