Article content continued

The rare motion to dismiss the allegations — rather than argue their merits — will be heard by a panel of OSC commissioners on Thursday. With his drastic measure, Mr. Finkelstein is attempting to put the watchdog’s own actions on trial.

“This motion provides a unique opportunity for the panel to deliver a clear and unequivocal direction to Staff about the proper conduct of Wells processes,” declared the filing by Mr. Finkelstein’s lawyer. “Allowing the proceedings to continue in these circumstances threaten to bring the OSC’s enforcement regime and its administration of justice into disrepute.”

Mr. Finkelstein’s complaint is based on the argument that OSC staff provided insufficient information and details about the case against Mr. Finkelstein when they issued him an enforcement notice on Nov. 3, 2010; that he was not afforded a reasonable amount of time to respond; and was denied more than a 36-hour extension when he asked.

According to his argument, OSC staff delivered a notice that “contained no description whatsoever” of the allegations against him, “except to say that he ‘tipped’”.

Furthermore, commission staff initially demanded a response five days later. Mr. Finkelstein argues OSC staff imposed an impossible deadline for a response, which he failed to meet, because it was motivated by a statutory limitation period that was soon to expire.

Staff at the securities regulator intend to fight the motion.