A physician’s appeal of a decision of the Discipline Committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (the “College”) was dismissed where the court found that the Committee’s decision was reasonable and supported by evidence and reasons which stood up to a probing examination

27. December 2005 0
Administrative law – Physicians and Surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct – Penalties – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Dr. R.A.R. v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, [2005] O.J. No. 4219, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, September 14, 2005, ...

A professional engineer (Visser) was successful in obtaining an Order prohibiting the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia (the “Association”) from proceeding with a second inquiry in relation to a complaint made about Visser. The court held that permitting the Association to re-characterize the same conduct and then proceed with a second inquiry would represent an abuse of process.

27. December 2005 0
Administrative law – Engineers – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Association of Professional Engineers – Estoppel and res judicata – Judicial review – Abuse of process Visser v. Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia, [2005] B.C.J. No. 2108, British Columbia Supreme Court, October 5, 2005, Baker J. On October ...

An application for judicial review with respect to issues relating to an ongoing disciplinary hearing under the Alberta Police Act was dismissed on the basis of prematurity

22. November 2005 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Police Commission – Disciplinary proceedings – Hearings – Pending hearings – Discretion of court to interfere – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Bias – Remedies – Availability Smyth v. Edmonton (City) Police Service, [2005] A.J. No. 1216, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, September 6, 2005, Lefsrud J. The ...

The Court dismissed the appeal of Psychologist “Y” from the decision of the lower Court dismissing his assertion that the Nova Scotia Board of Examiners had no jurisdiction to pursue charges against him. The Court of Appeal held that an Order of prohibition was a drastic remedy to be used only in the clearest of cases and, in this case, it was desirable to have a full hearing and a determination of the issues on the merits. It was not clear that the Board had no authority to continue with the proceeding.

22. November 2005 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Board of Examiners of Psychologists – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Accreditation – Misrepresentation – Jurisdiction of tribunal – Judicial review – Stay of proceedings – Remedies – Prohibition – Availability Psychologist “Y” v. Nova Scotia Board of Examiners in Psychology, [2005] N.S.J. No. 350, ...

A Hearing Officer stayed a disciplinary hearing under the Ontario Police Services Act on the basis that the hearing would constitute an abuse of process after the accused police officer had been acquitted on criminal charges arising from the same conduct that triggered the hearing. This decision was quashed on judicial review as the court found that proceeding with the disciplinary hearing would not constitute an abuse of process.

22. November 2005 0
Administrative law – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Criminal charges – Evidence – Hearings – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Police Commission – Abuse of process – Test – Judicial review – Stay of proceedings – Standard of review – Correctness Peel (Regional Municipality) Police Service v. Watson, [2005] O.J. No. 3525, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, August 18, ...

A dentist (“Dr. Hover”) was unsuccessful in his appeal from a decision of the Alberta Dental Association upholding a finding of professional misconduct, including a finding that he had failed to produce his records to them without justification

22. November 2005 0
Administrative law – Dentists – Disciplinary proceedings – Hearings – Failure to produce records – Penalties and suspensions – Judicial review – Bias – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Evidence –  Of administrative tribunals – Dental Association Hover v. Alberta Dental Association, [2005] A.J. No. 1254, Alberta Court of Appeal, October 3, 2005, Conrad, Picard and ...

A former student of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario brought an application for judicial review of a decision of the Appeal Committee of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario (“ICAO”) which allowed an appeal from the sanction imposed by the Discipline Committee and ruled that the student’s name was to be disclosed in the publication reporting the sanction and that his discipline file was not to be sealed. The court held that the decision of the Appeal Committee was reasonable and the application was therefore dismissed.

27. September 2005 0
Administrative law – Accountants – Disciplinary proceedings – Suspensions – Penalties – Publication ban – Judicial review – Jurisdiction of tribunal – Disclosure – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter John Doe v. Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario, [2005] O.J. No. 3013, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, July 14, 2005, P.T. Matlow, E.M. Macdonald and ...

A dentist (“Dr. Sigesmund”) with a practice restricted to the treatment of temporomandibular joint disorders was partially successful in his appeal from a decision of the Discipline Committee of the Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario (the “College”) where he was originally found guilty of multiple counts of professional misconduct

27. September 2005 0
Administrative law – Dentists – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Dental Surgeons – Judicial review – Witnesses – Bias – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Sigesmund v. Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario, [2005] O.J. No. 3267, Ontario Superior Court of ...

A family physician (“Dr. Anstead”) appealed an order of the Joint Medical Professional Review Committee (the “Committee”) requiring him to repay $15,746.72 in professional fees. The Court held that the reasons provided by the Committee were insufficient and referred the matter back to the Committee with a direction to provide supporting reasons for its decision.

Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Billing matters – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Failure to provide reasons – Test – Judicial review – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness Anstead v. Joint Medical Professional Review Committee, [2005] S.J. No. 373, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, ...

A sergeant of the Regina Police Force (“Watson”) was successful in obtaining an order quashing a disciplinary decision on the basis that there was inordinate delay by the Saskatchewan Police Commission (the “Commission”) in responding to Watson’s request for permission to appeal the decision

Administrative law – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Police Commission – Hearings – Appeals – Unreasonable delay – Test – Judicial review – Natural justice – Delay – Privative clauses Watson v. Saskatchewan (Police Commission), [2005] S.J. No. 407, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, June 16, 2005, Hunter J. On December 18, 1999, ...