In the medical profession, a doctor who has sex with a patient automatically loses his or her licence.

In the legal profession, a lawyer who has sex with a client can face a mere suspension.

The case of Toronto lawyer Antonio (Anthony) Macri, who was suspended for two and a half months Friday for having sex with a client and failing to inform his firm, demonstrates the stark contrast between how such conduct is handled by the self-regulating bodies that govern doctors and lawyers in Ontario.

“Lawyers who have sex with their clients should be subject to mandatory penalty of disbarment, the ultimate penalty that law societies can impose on lawyers,” said University of Ottawa law professor Adam Dodek, speaking generally.

“It is surely time to revisit the issue in the public interest.”

The case against Macri was outlined in an agreed statement of facts filed at the Law Society Tribunal. As well as being suspended, he was also fined $2,500 and ordered to pay a further $2,000 in costs.

He was found to have acted in a conflict of interest by representing the client in her family court proceeding while also engaged in a sexual relationship with her. He was further found to have acted “without integrity” by failing to inform his firm of the relationship and that he had loaned her $50,000.

Macri, who was called to the bar in 1997, was also found to have “behaved dishonourably” by sending “a series of uncivil text messages and emails to Client A, some of which implied he may use solicitor-client and/or privileged information against her should she fail to reimburse him funds he loaned her over the course of their personal and professional relationship,” according to Law Society documents.

The lawyer apologized to a three-member panel at his disciplinary hearing.

“I am deeply sorry for my actions,” Macri said, at times becoming emotional. “I crossed a line that should have been clearer… I’ve paid a price for my actions. I am the only person to blame. The line is clearer to me now, and I will never cross it again.”

Lawyer Lisa Freeman, representing the Law Society, told the panel there is currently no outright ban on lawyers having sex with their clients.

“I think we probably need a rule change,” she said. “I don’t understand why there is a prohibition in the health profession and not in the legal profession.”

The ban on doctors having sex with their patients, along with the penalty of mandatory revocation of their licence, has been upheld by the Ontario Court of Appeal, which has stated that there is a clear power imbalance between a doctor and a patient.

Medical malpractice lawyer Paul Harte, who is familiar with that prohibition, told the Star a lawyer should be subjected to the same penalties as physicians when there has been a finding that the lawyer took advantage of a vulnerable client.

“Many lawyers work with vulnerable individuals. For example, personal injury lawyers, criminal lawyers and family lawyers,” he said. “In my view, in these circumstances there should be no physical relationship during the lawyer-client relationship and for a reasonable period after ending the relationship because of the potential vulnerability.”

Law Society rules in place at the time of Macri’s misconduct say that a lawyer engaging in a sexual relationship with a client “may conflict with the lawyer’s duty to provide objective, disinterested professional advice to the client.” The lawyer should consider several factors, including whether the client is vulnerable and if the relationship could create a power imbalance.

In the Macri case, the client was found to be particularly vulnerable. She was a stay-at-home mother to two small children in an unhappy marriage who was financially dependent on her husband, a man who was charged for allegedly vandalizing her personal property, according to the agreed statement of fact. Her court proceeding was described as “complicated and heated.”

For a period of about four months after Macri was retained to represent Client A, they engaged in a “secret consensual sexual relationship.” After that ended, Macri continued an intimate personal relationship with the woman, “which included their shared hope that their romantic relationship would resume once the litigation concluded.”

As the woman’s case dragged on in court, Macri gave her $60,000 over a period of about three months in 2013 to cover her legal fees with the firm and personal expenses — $10,000 of which was characterized as a gift. The client agreed to repay the remaining $50,000 when the sale of her home was completed, according to the agreed statement of fact.

When the sale was completed and she refused to reimburse him, Macri sent her threatening texts and an email “wherein he implied he would divulge confidential and privileged information about Client A to her husband.”

In one text message, he said: “You don’t want to screw me over like this. Your case isn’t over. You still need me.”

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

She replied: “Don’t blackmail me,” to which Macri said: “Seriously? You want me as an enemy??? Pay what you promised you would. Pay it this week.” She told him he was threatening her, which he denied.

The client then reported the relationship and communications to Macri’s firm. He admitted to having had an inappropriate relationship with the client and loaning her money, and was then fired and reported to the Law Society.

Macri never did recoup the funds he loaned to the client, which his lawyer told the tribunal was money he was saving as a down payment on a home for himself and his two children. He now works on his own, and only this year his practice became financially viable.