A Canadian man who’s in prison for securities fraud in the U.S. doesn’t merit the assistance of court-appointed counsel to help him with his ongoing legal challenges in that case — but he should get help with the tricky task of making filings from a foreign prison, an Ontario court ruled.
The Court of Appeal for Ontario rejected a request from George Georgiou — who was sentenced to 25 years in prison and ordered to forfeit US$55 million by a judge in Pennsylvania for his role in a major securities fraud back in 2010 — seeking court-appointed legal counsel to assist in his ongoing litigation, including efforts to oppose a U.S. forfeiture order targeting $9.2 million held in a Canadian bank account.
According to the appeal court, in 2017, Georgiou applied to an Ontario court for a stay of the U.S. forfeiture order against him, and asked the court to “terminate” the order.
A lower court judge dismissed that application on the basis that it was “manifestly frivolous” because the Canadian court has no jurisdiction to strike down a U.S. court order. An appeal of that decision was rejected, and the Supreme Court of Canada declined to hear a further appeal. In 2021, the U.S. forfeiture order was entered as a judgment in Canada, making it legally enforceable.
Now, the Ontario Court of Appeal has addressed the question of whether Georgiou should be provided with state-appointed legal counsel for his ongoing efforts to challenge that order.
The Court of Appeal denied the request, ruling that he’s capable of representing himself, and that he likely doesn’t have a viable case.
“Mr. Georgiou has repeatedly raised unfounded allegations of abuse of process in the American proceedings, which have been repeatedly denied,” the appeal court said. It added that he has also raised Charter issues in the case, which the Court of Appeal also rejected, finding that, “There is no basis for these claims.”
However, the appeal court’s opinion of the value of his arguments only impacts whether he should receive legal counsel to pursue his appeal.
“This does not decide his appeal on the merits, which is a matter for the panel that will ultimately hear it,” the court said.
At the same time, the court also concluded that Georgiou is able to represent himself in court.
“Mr. Georgiou’s motion materials were well-prepared. He is as articulate a litigant as I have ever seen. His knowledge of the file and the applicable law is manifest and comprehensive,” the appeal court said.
As a result, it found that he can effectively pursue his appeal without the help of legal counsel — however, it also acknowledged the logistical difficulties of pursuing his case while locked up in a foreign prison.
Given that challenge, the court directed the Crown to “provide Mr. Georgiou with logistical support where necessary to assist him in completing and filing his motion for leave to appeal materials.”