A federal appeals court has rejected a challenge from a Liberal government appointee who disputed an Ethics Commissioner request that he leave his private law practice to comply with federal conflict-of-interest rules.Lloyd Hogan, a Cape Breton lawyer appointed to the Veterans Review and Appeal Board in 2025 for a five-year term, went to court after the Ethics Commissioner directed him to resign as sole director of his law firm, Tuckamore Law Inc.“What happened here?” wrote Justice David Stratas of the Federal Court of Appeal. “The Ethics Commissioner gave the applicant a proposal and the Commissioner had to try to reach an agreement with the applicant.”Blacklock's Reporter said Hogan was appointed as a public office holder while continuing to practise law. Following an investigation, the Ethics Commissioner concluded his private practice raised concerns under the Conflict Of Interest Act.“Following an investigation, the Ethics Commissioner told the applicant on August 27 to resign as a sole director of Tuckamore Law Inc.,” wrote Stratas.Hogan was warned that if he did not leave private practice, the Commissioner would issue a compliance order.Section 29 of the Act permits the Ethics Commissioner to “determine the appropriate measures by which a public office holder shall comply with the Act” while requiring the Commissioner to “try to achieve agreement with the public office holder,” the court noted.The Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner does not comment on ongoing investigations.Ethics Commissioner Konrad von Finckenstein told the Commons ethics committee May 4 that his office seeks to prevent conflicts by advising public office holders about their obligations.“The purpose of the Act is to have a preventive system,” said von Finckenstein. “As soon as someone is elected or appointed, they must declare all their conflicts of interest.”“We review them and then we tell those people what is and isn’t allowed,” he said. “They are subject to a code, and our office can also give them advice if certain situations arise.”.Court challenges involving decisions by the Ethics Commissioner are uncommon but have previously reached the Supreme Court.In a unanimous July 30 ruling, the Supreme Court struck down section 66 of the Conflict Of Interest Act, which had shielded decisions by the Ethics Commissioner from judicial review.The case stemmed from a challenge to a 2021 decision by then-Ethics Commissioner Mario Dion clearing former prime minister Justin Trudeau of a conflict of interest over the proposed awarding of a $43.5 million grant to WE Charity.The federal contractor had provided $471,751 in benefits to members of Trudeau’s family, including speaking fees, gifts and expense-paid trips to London and New York.“Irrational administrative decisions are unlawful,” the Supreme Court wrote.
