Sujata Sharan

In a recent development that has raised serious ethical questions within the legal community, Sujata Sharan, a Burlington-based attorney, is facing allegations of exploiting a neighbor suffering from dementia to acquire her property at a significantly reduced price. This accusation has led to the suspension of her legal license by the Ontario Law Society Tribunal.

During a decisive hearing on December 11, which addressed an "interlocutory suspension" motion, representatives from the Law Society of Ontario emphasized that Sharan had not demonstrated the level of integrity and reliability expected of legal professionals. The tribunal panel, citing concerns over potential harm to the public and the integrity of the justice system, resolved to suspend her license indefinitely. This decision was based on substantial suspicion that Sharan's continued practice might pose a significant risk.

The Law Society is currently conducting a comprehensive investigation into the matter. This probe focuses on several serious allegations, including Sharan's attempt to destroy evidence and provide misleading information during an investigative interview. Additionally, it scrutinizes the circumstances surrounding her acquisition of her elderly neighbor's residence through a private transaction, which was allegedly conducted on terms highly advantageous to Sharan, possibly exploiting her neighbor's diminished mental capacity.

Complications have arisen in the investigation due to Sharan's reluctance to submit all the required documentation, as revealed during the hearing.

When The Spectator reached out to Sharan for her comments on the issue, as well as to her attorney, Scott Beattie, who is representing her against a civil lawsuit initiated by the neighbor's family, they opted not to comment, citing ongoing litigation.

Sharan, who primarily practices in real estate law, holds legal licenses in India, the United Kingdom, and, until recently, Ontario, where she has been licensed since 2021.

The neighbor's family alleges that Sharan acquired the elderly woman's home, located directly across from her, at a value significantly below the market rate. They claim the purchase price was at least $300,000 less than the fair market value, which was estimated to be around $1.1 million at the time of the transaction's closure. These allegations form the crux of the complaint lodged against Sharan with the Law Society.