Former MP Raj Grewal faces law licence suspension amid fraud allegations

Open this photo in gallery:

The Law Society of Ontario has launched a case to suspend former MP Rajvinder Grewal from practising law, alleging he participated in real estate fraud that could cost investors more than $100-million.

Mr. Grewal, 40, is also separately at the centre of a storm of litigation, with more than a dozen civil court claims seeking the return of tens of millions of dollars in overdue loans or misappropriated funds, adding up to as much as $247-million in dispute.

The LSO is a self-regulatory body for lawyers and paralegals in the province. The society is launching this case two years after one of its committees gave Mr. Grewal a pass on previous allegations of fraud connected to a high-profile gambling scandal that led to his resignation from politics in 2018.

Elected as a Liberal in Brampton East during former prime minister Justin Trudeau’s 2015 victory, Mr. Grewal later admitted he lost millions of dollars gambling in Quebec casinos beginning in 2016. He was investigated by the RCMP and charged with fraud and breach of trust in relation to money he borrowed to cover some of those debts while serving as an MP. However, some of those charges were dropped and he was found not guilty of others during a trial in 2023.

Former Liberal MP Raj Grewal cleared of criminal charges

In a decision from February, 2024, which is still attached to Mr. Grewal’s public registry as a lawyer, the LSO’s proceedings authorization committee ruled that when he borrowed $1-million from six individuals and a client company between 2016 and 2018, “he was not forthright with them about the purpose for which the money would be used.” However, the committee ruled “the Lawyer is unlikely to conduct himself similarly in the future,” and didn’t take disciplinary action against Mr. Grewal at the time.

Now, the LSO is seeking to suspend Mr. Grewal’s ability to practice law because “there are reasonable grounds for believing that there is a significant risk of harm to members of the public, or to the public interest in the administration of justice.”

On July 10, the independent Law Society Tribunal issued a notice to Mr. Grewal that it was seeking his suspension. The notice was issued one day after the tribunal sent the same notice to his legal associate Davinder Khattra, 29. Mr. Khattra has been listed as the owner of RSG Law Professional Corp. since 2024, although the firm was founded by Mr. Grewal and still bears his initials.

There are 26 complaints described in the LSO’s allegations against the two lawyers, including misappropriation of trust funds, registration of charges (or loans) against properties without the consent of the owners, fraudulently discharging mortgages, falsifying title insurance and receiving fraudulent cheques in a trust fund scheme. Some of the more than $100-million described in the LSO’s complaints has been returned, but much of it remains unaccounted for.

On Wednesday, the tribunal held Mr. Khattra’s first hearing on the matter and suspended his licence to practice law, effective immediately. The LSO’s representative Megan Phyper said that as of the hearing, Mr. Khattra had still not provided access to RSG’s bank records for the investigation. She noted that in proven cases of misappropriation or mortgage fraud, the tribunal’s case law is clear that the penalty would be to revoke one’s law licence.

Spencer Bass, lawyer with Stockwoods LLP, represented Mr. Khattra in the hearing and didn’t oppose the suspension, but also did not admit to the allegations in the LSO application.

Mr. Grewal’s hearing is scheduled for Aug. 14. None of the allegations have been proven in court or tribunal.

A lawyer for Mr. Grewal in the LSO matter said she could not comment on the allegations against him. “I can advise that Mr. Grewal is cooperating with the Law Society of Ontario’s ongoing investigation and intends to vigorously defend himself in these proceedings,” said Amanda Ross, lawyer with Goldbloom Ross Cunningham LLP, in an e-mail.

After his acquittal on the fraud and breach of trust charges in 2023, Mr. Singh returned to practising law, and according to court records, was also working with his father Avtar Singh Grewal on mortgage financing.

In addition to the LSO case, the allegations in the separate civil court actions could more than double the amount of money at issue.

The largest single claim is not cited in the LSO complaints, and was filed on June 26 from members of the Cesana family, who own the Hardrock Group of concrete companies. They are seeking the return of $137-million allegedly borrowed by Mr. Grewal and members of his family, including his wife and father-in-law. Much of the money was borrowed in September, 2024, at a 12-per-cent interest rate, the claim says.

Another RSG client filed a lawsuit in Ontario’s Superior Court of Justice on July 13, seeking the repayment of $10-million, and is also not named in the LSO complaints.

Burlington, Ont.-based couple Sukhdeep Kang and Surjit Kang claim that RSG acted on their behalf to find a lender – Stercus Accidit Finance Corp. – when they wanted to borrow $10.8-million to construct a new home in December, 2025. According to the filing, the Kangs say they repaid the loan in four transfers to RSG’s trust account between January and March, 2026.

They say they received evidence from RSG that the money had been paid to Stercus and the mortgage was removed from the title. But they were later contacted by Stercus, which alleged it had not been repaid, and demanded repayment because the loan was in default.

That same pattern appears multiple times in the allegations laid out in LSO documents: One party (in some cases, a lender, and in some cases, a homeowner) alleges they transferred money to RSG’s trust fund to pay out a mortgage. RSG then discharges the loan record from the property title, but the money held in trust disappears and is not forwarded to the intended third party.

At one point, the LSO alleges, Mr. Khattra told lenders seeking their money “that if they reported his conduct to the police or cooperated with the Law Society, they would not receive funds.”

In another example of alleged fraud in June, 2026, Surjit Singh filed a complaint to the LSO claiming misconduct during an attempt last November to refinance a commercial property in Mississauga, which he owned through a numbered company. RSG accepted $4.2-million from National Bank of Canada into its trust account that was meant to repay a loan Mr. Singh had with Royal Bank of Canada. But Mr. Singh alleges the money was never sent to RBC.

After Mr. Singh learned of the alleged misappropriation in 2026, he performed a title search of a second property he owned in Mississauga. He claims that beginning in November, 2024, RSG registered $10-million in loans from Addison Wealth Management Inc. against that property without his knowledge. In March, 2026, one of those loans was increased from $4-million to $7-million, again allegedly without his knowledge or receiving the funds.

Some in the legal community have begun to question the LSO’s 2024 decision to let Mr. Grewal continue practising after admitting he was not forthright when it came to client funds.

“That is dishonesty about money … No conditions, no restrictions, no finding. On that record, the committee was far too lenient,” said Allan J. Ritchie, partner and chair of Loopstra Nixon LLP, in a statement. He stressed that he was commenting as a lawyer, and not on behalf of his firm or any organization. “The current allegations are unproven, but if they are borne out, the conduct is the same conduct, dishonesty with other people’s money.”

Lawyer Jonathan Rosenthal was the chair of the LSO committee that cleared Mr. Grewal in 2024. He is currently serving as an adjudicator at the tribunal, and sits on the Law Society Foundation’s board of trustees. When reached by e-mail, he said “it would not be appropriate to comment on a decision,” given his roles.

When asked whether that 2024 decision was a mistake, LSO’s senior communications adviser Amy Lewis said in an e-mail that “the nature of any regulatory action depends on specific statutory and evidentiary thresholds.” She added the decision was made “based on the information known to the Law Society at the time.”

But what the LSO knew at the time remains precisely the issue, according to Mr. Ritchie.

“Where the record discloses dishonesty about money, the allegations deserve full investigation and a tested outcome, not a conversation,” he said. “That is what the public is entitled to expect from a self-governing profession, and it is how we keep the privilege of self-regulation.”