Discipline panel questions whether lawyer was ever competent enough to practise in Manitoba

A lawyer who practised in India for over two decades has been found incompetent to practise law in Manitoba, after a review by the Law Society of Manitoba found significant gaps in his knowledge of Canadian law. 

A panel found Vibhu Raj Jhanji incompetent to practise law on Jan. 14, 2020.

In its decision, the panel raised concerns about how Jhanji was ever allowed to practise law in Manitoba in the first place given his level of incompetence.

Jhanji was initially suspended from practising law in December 2018, after concerns about his competence were brought to the law society, said Kris Dangerfield, the society's chief executive officer. 

This included a letter from Manitoba Chief Justice Richard Chartier about some issues he'd observed in court. 

According to the written decision, two longtime Manitoba lawyers reviewed files in four of Jhanji's cases in August 2018. In one case where Jhanji was representing a landlord suing their insurer, the lawyers said much of Jhanji's work "simply made no sense. 

"According to the reviewers, Mr. Jhanji's pleading was 'long, rambling, and largely unintelligible,'" the decision said. 

They also found that Jhanji's office management systems in his basement apartment were "non-existent"; that he didn't have an accounting system, a comprehensive client list or a system for file opening. 

During a hearing for Jhanji's case, the panel heard that the lawyer encouraged a client to persuade the complainant — his client's spouse — "to make certain representations to influence the outcome of a matter," the decision says. 

This would have meant breaking his client's bail conditions. When asked about this, Jhanji admitted he did not know the process to seek an amendment to a bail condition, the decision says. 

Lawyer cared about his clients

However, the lawyers who reviewed his practice noted that Jhanji "genuinely cares about his clients." 

According to the decision, Jhanji was born in India and began working as a lawyer there in 1991. He and his wife applied to immigrate to Canada in 2004, but his wife died before their application could be completed. 

He arrived in Winnipeg with his son in 2012 and proceeded to take courses so he could practise law in Manitoba. He articled for a small firm and was called to the bar in 2015. 

During hearings on his discipline case, Jhanji insisted that he was a competent lawyer who fiercely advocates for his clients, though he admitted he could stand to improve and was open to being under the supervision of another lawyer. 

However, when asked what steps he had taken to improve his competency since concerns were first raised about him, he couldn't identify anything in particular. 

Questions about how lawyer passed the bar 

In their conclusion about Jhanji's competence, the panellists — Ted Bock, Roberta Campbell and Maureen Morrison — wrote that there was no evidence that he was ever competent to practise law in Manitoba. 

"Simply put, if Mr. Jhanji was never competent, how did he gain admission to the profession in the first place? That is a question that the Law Society ought to consider." 

In Jhanji's case, he did complete all the requirements that were expected of him, including completing a program from the National Committee on Accreditation, which assesses the legal education and professional experience of lawyers who obtained their credentials outside of Canada. 

However, these requirements would have demonstrated he had entry-level competence skills, Dangerfield said. 

"But it was evident to us based on the concerns that were brought to our attention very early on that Mr. Jhanji  was doing work that was beyond his skill level. And so we have to ask ourselves why that was," she said. 

The case also prompted the law society to review its processes and whether they could be doing anything differently to better prepare new lawyers and those who are supervising them. 

"I think there's a whole number of issues that we're looking at because we want to ensure that when lawyers are called to the bar that they do have the skills that they need, because practising law is a stressful business and there are a whole range of skill sets that are required," she said.

Another date has to be set to determine what disciplinary action Jhanji will face. 

Dangerfield said putting Jhanji under the supervision of another lawyer could be an option, but it will be up to the panellists to decide what is in the best interest of the public.