The Court found Section 63(1) of the Judges Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. J-1 constitutional. This provision permits the Federal and Provincial Attorneys General to commence inquiries regarding whether certain judges could be removed from office without following screening procedures set out in s. 63(2). The appropriate test applied considering the constitutionality of s. 63(1) was whether or not a reasonable person would have a reasonable apprehension the section would impair judges’ impartiality by requiring the Council to commence inquiries without engaging the screening procedure. There were sufficient safeguards in the s. 63(1) process, despite the fact the screening procedure was not required.

22. May 2007 0
Administrative law – Judges – Removal from office – Inquiry – Constitutionality – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation Cosgrove v. Canadian Judicial Council, [2007] F.C.J. No. 352, Federal Court of Appeal, March 12, 2007, Sexton, Evans and Sharlow JJ.A. After a criminal trial, the Attorney General of Ontario wrote to the Canadian Judicial Council (the ...

A physician (“Mussani”) found guilty of sexual abuse by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (the “College”) challenged the constitutionality of the zero tolerance/mandatory revocation scheme governing discipline for specific acts of sexual conduct between health professionals and their patients under Ontario’s Health Professions Procedural Code (the “Code”). The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and upheld the Mandatory Revocation Provisions of the Code.

22. February 2005 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Judicial review – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Sexual acts – Penalties – Mandatory suspensions – Constitutionality – Charter of Rights – Application to disciplinary proceedings Mussani v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, [2004] O.J. No. ...