A verdict in the Rob Ford conflict of interest case could come down as early as four weeks from now, prominent municipal law experts believe.

Municipal law specialist John Mascarin predicts Justice Charles Hackland will return with a ruling by November.

Rob Ford conflict of interest case: Click here to read our live blog

“Justice Hackland is the chief judge in the eastern region. My sense is that (because) he’s always on his guys to deliver timely judgments, I predict a decision in one to two months,” said Mascarin, a partner at Aird and Berlis LLP.

But it’s a verdict Hackland won’t rush, Mascarin added. At stake is Ford’s job. Never before has such a high-profile Canadian politician been in this position, he said.

For this reason, municipal lawyer Freya Kristjanson, who represented Mayor Hazel McCallion during the Mississauga Judicial Inquiry, believes Hackland could take much longer.

“There is no ‘typical.’ The potential to remove a mayor from office is one any judge would want to review carefully,” she said. “I’d be surprised if it’s less than a month. Given the issue and public importance, I’d predict between four weeks and four months.”

Kristjanson did not want to comment on how Hackland may rule, but Mascarin said he believes there is a very good chance that Ford is going to lose his job.

“He has clearly breached the Act. There is no question. The only question is whether (Ford will be let off) because the amount is so small. There is an exception for an insignificant amount of money,” he said. “I’d be surprised if Judge Hackland (accepts that argument) though.”

Ford is accused of violating the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act for speaking, and then voting on, an item at council which lawyer Clayton Ruby alleges was financially beneficial. The city’s integrity commissioner had ordered Ford to repay $3,150 in donations to the mayor’s private football foundation, because Ford had used city materials to solicit donations.

Council was asked to overturn that ruling, which it did. Before the vote, Ford spoke on his own behalf. He also cast a vote, though it would have passed regardless.

Private citizen Paul Magder believed this to be a conflict and contacted Ruby, a renowned constitutional lawyer.

On the witness stand yesterday, Ford made no apologies for continuing to support his charity, but he said he probably would have acted differently if someone had warned him he had a conflict.

The defence argument is that because the funds were going to the football foundation, Ford didn’t personally benefit. The plaintiffs allege that because the integrity commissioner ruled that Ford personally needed to repay the money, he did.

ALSO FROM THE STAR:

Royson James on Rob Ford trial: What’s so hard about integrity?

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Rob Ford conflict of interest trial: What happened on Day 1