A gastroenterologist (“Dr. Gopinath”) secured a ruling from the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board (“Appeal Board”) renewing his privileges without condition. The Toronto East General Hospital (the “Hospital”) was unsuccessful on an appeal where it attempted to restore the earlier decision of the Hospital Board denying him privileges unless he signed an undertaking and agreement to participate in the Physician Health Program (“PHP”).

24. June 2014 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Hospital Appeal Board – Hearings – Hearing de novo – Physicians and Surgeons – Hospital privileges – Disruptive behaviour – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Evidence Toronto East General Hospital v. Gopinath, [2014], O.J. No. 2248, 2014 ONSC 2731, Ontario Superior Court ...

The plaintiff’s lawyer had previously represented the defendant Credit Union in small collections matters from 1993-2008. The plaintiff was the CEO of another Credit Union and the lawyer advised both the plaintiff and the other Credit Union with respect to the employment agreement. In 2012, after the plaintiff’s Credit Union had been acquired by the defendant, the lawyer represented him in negotiating his new employment agreement with the defendant. The plaintiff was eventually fired after his previous employer exercised its option to amalgamate with the defendant. The defendant brought a motion to have the lawyer removed as solicitor on record for the plaintiff due to a conflict of interest. The court dismissed the motion on the basis that the amalgamation did not cause the lawyer to be in a conflict of interest against the defendant, and there was no evidence that the lawyer’s previous retainers with the defendant were sufficiently related to the retainer in respect of the wrongful termination action so as to disqualify him from acting for the plaintiff.

24. June 2014 0
Administrative law – Barristers, solicitors, notaries and paralegals – Professional governance and discipline – Solicitor-client privilege – Conflict of interest DeRosa v. Pace Savings & Credit Union Ltd., [2014] O.J. No. 1939, 2014 ONSC 935, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, February 21, 2014, C.J. Brown J. The defendant brought a motion for an order removing ...

Application for judicial review of decision of Professional Conduct Tribunal of Certified General Accountants’ Association of Ontario convicting the applicant of professional misconduct

27. May 2014 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Certified General Accountants – Accountants – Disciplinary proceedings – Investigations – Judicial review – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness – Jurisdiction – Failure to provide reasons – Judicial review application – Premature – Remedies – Alternative remedies Voudouris v. Certified General Accountants’ Assn. of Ontario, [2014] ...

Appeal by recipient of disability support payments from a decision quashing an order of the Ontario Social Benefits Tribunal forgiving recovery of one-half of overpayment

27. May 2014 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Disability Support Program – Overpayment – Discretion of tribunal – Jurisdiction – Regulatory powers of tribunal – Government – Funding of programs – Social assistance – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Statutory interpretation Ontario (Director, Disability Support Program) v. Surdivall, [2014] O.J. No. 1505, 2014 ...

The Applicants (individual practitioners and their Association) were unsuccessful in challenging the Respondent Council’s registration regulation relating to the practice of Traditional Chinese Medicine

25. March 2014 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners – Governance – Self-governing professions – Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Legislation – Ultra vires Yuan v. Transitional Council of the College of Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners and Acupuncturists of Ontario, [2014] O.J. ...

The appellant registered nurse was denied registration as a Nurse Practitioner by the Registration Committee of the College of Nurses of Ontario (the “Registration Committee”), on the basis that she had failed written examinations on three occasions and there was no discretion to afford a fourth attempt. The appellant applied for review of the Registration Committee’s decision to the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board (the “Board”) which affirmed the Registration Committee’s decision. The appellant then appealed the Board’s decision to the Court, which dismissed her appeal, finding that the Board’s decision was reasonable, and there was no evidence before it upon which they could have found the examination to be unfair to the applicant because of its American content or the stress created by having to write the examination. What was before the Board was little more than a bare allegation of unfairness advanced by the appellant.

25. February 2014 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Nurses – Nurses – Governance – Permits and licences – Competence – Training requirements – Fairness – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Evidence Al Baba v. College of Nurses of Ontario, [2013] O.J. No. 5392, 2013 ONSC 7335, Ontario Superior ...

The petitioner, Liquor Control Board of Ontario, sought judicial review of an Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario order that it cease its practice of collecting personal information in relation to the sale of alcohol to unlicensed clubs

25. February 2014 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Liquor Licensing Board – Freedom of information and protection of privacy – Collection of records – Public body – Crown agents – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness Ontario (Liquor Control Board) v. Vin de Garde Wine Club, [2013] O.J. No. 5788, 2013 ONSC 5854, Ontario ...

The Divisional Court of Ontario permitted an application for judicial review by a student who had been expelled by the headmaster of a private school for smoking marijuana. The Court of Appeal held that such a decision was not within the jurisdiction of the court to review for two reasons: one, the nexus between the school’s enabling Act and the expulsion decision was not specific enough to make the decision an exercise of statutory power; and two, even if there was a nexus, the decision could not be reviewed by public law or subject to a public law remedy because the decision maker was a private school created by private statute, and its disciplinary decisions are regulated by contracts between the school and the students’ parents.

28. January 2014 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – School boards – Powers and duties – Statutory provisions – Schools – Students – Code of conduct – Expulsion of students – Judicial review – Jurisdiction – Compliance with legislation Setia v. Appleby College, [2013] O.J. No. 5736, 2013 ONCA 753, Ontario Court of Appeal, December 13, ...

Appeal from decision of Ontario Securities Commission finding appellants contravened Securities Act

24. December 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Securities Commission – Stock brokers – Professional governance and discipline – Competence – Investigations – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Evidence – Procedural requirements and fairness – Bias Taylor v. Ontario (Securities Commission), [2013] O.J. No. 4988, 2013 ONSC 6495, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, ...

The Ontario Divisional Court dismissed the appeal of the appellant physician from four decisions of the Committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (the “Committee”) when found that she failed to maintain the standards of practice of the profession; had engaged in disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional conduct; and demonstrated a lack of knowledge, skill and judgment in her treatment of a number of patients. The Court upheld the Committee’s penalty of a two year suspension and restrictive terms thereafter preventing the appellant from practising as a cosmetic surgeon, and performing any surgery except as a surgical assistant in a hospital under supervision. The Court also upheld the Committee’s finding that the appellant contravened the advertising regulation under the Medicine Act, 1991 S.O. 1991 c.30, finding that the CPSO’s ban on the use of testimonials and superlatives was constitutional.

24. December 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Physicians and surgeons – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Competence – Advertising – Penalties – Suspensions – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness – Reasonableness simpliciter Yazdanfar v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, [2013] O.J. No. ...