Order: In the Matter of Lance Kotton and Titan Equity Group Ltd.

IN THE MATTER OF THE SECURITIES ACT,

RSO 1990, c S.5

- and -

IN THE MATTER OF
LANCE KOTTON and
TITAN EQUITY GROUP LTD.

ORDER
(Rules 1.7.4 and 11 of the Ontario Securities Commission Rules of Procedure)

WHEREAS:

1. on November 6, 2015, the Ontario Securities Commission (the “Commission”) ordered pursuant to subsections 127(1) and (5) of the Securities Act, RSO 1990, c S.5, (the “Act”), that:
1. pursuant to clause 2 of subsection 127(1) of the Act, trading in any securities by Lance Kotton (“Kotton”) and Titan Equity Group Ltd. (“TEG” and, together with Kotton, the “Respondents”) cease; and
2. pursuant to clause 3 of subsection 127(1) of the Act, any exemptions contained in Ontario securities law not apply to the Respondents (the “Temporary Order”);
2. the Commission further ordered that the Temporary Order take effect immediately and expire on the 15th day after its making unless extended by order of the Commission;
3. on November 9, 2015, the Commission issued a Notice of Hearing providing notice that it would hold a hearing on November 19, 2015, to consider whether, pursuant to subsections 127(7) and 127(8) of the Act, it would be in the public interest for the Commission to extend the Temporary Order until the conclusion of the hearing or until such further time as considered necessary by the Commission, and to make such further orders as the Commission considers appropriate;
4. at the November 19 hearing, Staff of the Commission advised that the Respondents were represented by the firm of Crawley MacKewn Brush LLP, and that the Respondents had, through their counsel, consented to an extension of the Temporary Order to December 17, 2015, which order was further extended on consent to April 15, 2016;
5. the next hearing in this proceeding is scheduled for April 14, 2016;
6. on March 17, 2016, counsel for the Respondents moved, pursuant to Rule 1.7.4 of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure (2014), 37 OSCB 4168, for leave to withdraw as representative for the Respondents and requested that the motion be heard in writing (the “Withdrawal Motion”); and
7. there has been a breakdown in the client-lawyer relationship, as evidenced by the Affidavit of Anna Markiewicz, sworn March 17, 2016, and filed by Crawley MacKewn Brush LLP in support of the Withdrawal Motion (which affidavit has been marked as Exhibit 2 in this proceeding);

IT IS ORDERED that:

1. the Withdrawal Motion be heard in writing; and
2. Crawley MacKewn Brush LLP be granted leave to withdraw as representative for the Respondents.

DATED at Toronto this 28th day of March, 2016.