A police Constable appealed a Hearings Officer’s sentence of dismissal to the Commission. The Commission allowed the appeal and substituted a penalty of demotion. The Ontario Provincial Police (“OPP”) appealed the Commission’s decision to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. The appeal was allowed and the penalty imposed by the Hearing Officer was reinstated.

24. February 2004 0
Administrative law – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Penalties and suspensions – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Police Commission – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Favretto v. Ontario (Provincial Police), [2003] O.J. No. 5052, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, December 2, 2003, O’Driscoll, Then and Benotto JJ. On April 16, 1996, Constable Favretto, ...

The appeal of the College of Hearing Aid Practitioners of Alberta (the “College”) from the decision of the Health Disciplines Board (the “Board”) reversing a decision of the College Conduct and Competency Committee (the “Committee”) regarding the conduct of a member (“Zieniewicz”) was dismissed. The Court of Appeal found that the Committee failed to properly consider all evidence at the hearing of Zieniewicz and that the Board properly applied the standard of review in reversing the Committee’s decision.

27. January 2004 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Hearing Aid Practitioners – Disciplinary proceedings – Evidence – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Supervision of trainee – Delegated supervision – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Correctness College of Hearing Aid Practitioners of Alberta (Council of) v. Zieniewicz, [2003] A.J. ...

The Appellant medical doctor (“Markman”) was charged with four allegations of professional misconduct, along with an allegation of incompetence

27. January 2004 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Judicial intervention – Physicians and surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Sentencing – Public interest – Suspensions Markman v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, [2003] O.J. No. 3855, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, October 1, 2003, McRae, Gravely and Jennings JJ. ...

A chiropractor, convicted of six counts of professional misconduct and sentenced to nine months suspension and costs of over $80,000, unsuccessfully appealed the decision of the College of Chiropractors of Ontario to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice

23. December 2003 0
Administrative law – Chiropractors – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Penalties – Suspensions – Costs – Judicial review – Administrative decisions – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Ressel v. College of Chiropractors of Ontario, [2003] O.J. No. 3032, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, July 25, 2003, O’Driscoll, Then and Lang ...

A physician (“Lee”) appealed his conviction by a Panel of the Discipline Committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario on a charge of sexually abusing a patient. The Ontario Divisional Court allowed the appeal and ordered a new hearing on the basis that the Panel denied Lee natural justice and procedural fairness in the hearing by refusing to engage in an O’Connor-type inquiry into the evidence of the complainant’s psychologist, whose clinical records were illegible.

25. November 2003 0
Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Fairness – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Evidence – O’Connor motion – Hearing de novo – Judicial review – Procedural requirements – Natural justice – Hearings – Disclosure Lee v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, [2003] O.J. No. 3382, Ontario ...

The Ontario Divisional Court upheld the finding of insider trading against the head institutional trader and part owner of Yorkton Securities Inc. (“Donnini”) made by the Ontario Securities Commission (“OSC”). The court reduced the trading suspension imposed by the OSC from 15 years to 4 years and directed that the matter of costs, which had been assessed by the OSC at $186,052.30, be referred back to the OSC to conduct an inquiry into the extent of the bill in order to substantiate the amount.

25. November 2003 0
Administrative law – Stock brokers – Disciplinary proceedings – Suspensions – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Securities Commission – Penalties – Judicial review – Costs Donnini v. Ontario Securities Commission, [2003] O.J. No. 3541, Ontario Superior Court of Justice – Divisional Court, September 15, 2003, Lane, Somers and Greer JJ. On June 11, 2002, two of the members ...

A former school teacher (“Lurette”) who had been terminated from his employment after an investigation into a complaint alleging that he had engaged in sexual conduct with a student successfully applied for judicial review to quash the Board of Adjudication’s decision upholding the Province of New Brunswick’s decision to have him dismissed. Lurette alleged that the role of the Chair of the Board of Adjudication (“Poirier”) as an employee of the Service New Brunswick subsequent to the hearing but prior to the Board of Adjudication’s decision being rendered, created a reasonable apprehension of bias.

25. November 2003 0
Administrative law – Teachers – Disciplinary proceedings – Adjudication – Judicial review – Reasonable apprehension of bias – test – Procedural fairness – Natural justice Lurette v. New Brunswick (Minister of Education), [2003] N.B.J. No. 353, New Brunswick Court of Queen’s Bench, September 19, 2003, Young J. The court reviewed the principles of fundamental justice as including ...

The founder and chair of a Vancouver based brokerage house (“Smolensky”), petitioned for prerogative and Charter relief to preclude the Securities Commission from hearing an allegation of insider trading made against him. The hearing was to be convened to consider the imposition of sanctions against Smolensky. The court held that judicial review of the situation should not be granted, given that the Securities Act contained a privative clause providing that no application for a judicial review under the Judicial Review Procedure Act could be instituted against the Commission or an officer of the Commission for an act done in good faith in the exercise or intended exercise of any power under the Securities Act. The court further held that the judicial review was precluded by the court’s decision in Pezim, where it was determined that the Notice of Hearing was not issued pursuant to an exercise of a statutory power. Smolensky’s application for Charter relief was also denied on the grounds that section 148 of the Securities Act, which prohibits a person from disclosing except to their own lawyer any information or evidence obtained or sought to be obtained with respect to Securities Commission investigations and audits against them, did not violate sections 2, 7, 8, 11 or the Preamble of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

28. October 2003 0
Administrative law – Stock brokers – Disciplinary proceedings – Governance – Penalties – Suspensions – Judicial review application – Privative clauses – Compliance with legislation – Remedies – Self-governing professions – Charter of Rights – Discrimination – Validity of legislation Smolensky v. British Columbia (Securities Commission), [2003] B.C.J. No. 1805, British Columbia Supreme Court, July 29, 2003, ...

Gill was successful in having the Court of Appeal set aside the decision of the B.C. Securities Commission that the newly formed CDNX stock exchange had jurisdiction to discipline Gill for alleged breaches of the rules of the Vancouver Stock Exchange, a predecessor to the CDNX

23. September 2003 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Securities Commission – Compliance with rules and by-laws – Jurisdiction – Stock brokers – Disciplinary proceedings – Governance – Restructuring of stock exchanges – Survival of contracts – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness Gill v. Canadian Venture Exchange Inc., [2003] B.C.J. No. 1767, British Columbia Court ...

A psychiatric nurse (“Bennet”) was successful in his appeal from a decision of the Discipline Committee of the Registered Psychiatric Nurses’ Association of Manitoba (the “Association”). The court found that the Committee’s decision finding Bennet guilty of professional misconduct for having sexual intercourse with a former client was not reasonable as the Committee did not have sufficient evidence before it on the threshold issue of boundaries and/or therapeutic relationships.

26. August 2003 0
Administrative law – Psychiatric Nurses – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Sexual relations with former patient – Boundaries and therapeutic relationships – Judicial review – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Evidence Bennet v. Registered Psychiatric Nurses’ Assn. of Manitoba, [2003] M.J. No. 163, Manitoba Court of Appeal, May 15, 2003, Monnin, Hamilton ...