The Applicant police constable successfully sought leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal in respect of a fresh hearing that was conducted by the Respondent, Law Enforcement Review Board, relating to a penalty that was imposed on him by the other Respondent, the Edmonton Police Service

26. November 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Police Review Board – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Penalties and suspensions – Hearings  – Hearing de novo – Judicial review – Appeals – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Furlong v. Edmonton Police Service, [2013] A.J. No. 1119, 2013 ABCA ...

The issue in this matter concerns the authority of the police to direct an individual’s movements during the course of a traffic stop

26. November 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Police Review Board – Police – Authority to arrest – Disciplinary proceedings – Public interest – Judicial review – Evidence Adaikin v. Calgary (Police Service), [2013] A.J. No. 1028, 2013 ABCA 333, Alberta Court of Appeal, September 30, 2013, P.W.L. Martin, B.K. O’Ferrall and B.L. Veldhuis JJ.A. ...

Police officer’s appeal of dismissal of his application for judicial review was dismissed on the ground that a jurisdictional error, in and of itself, doesn’t constitute an exceptional circumstance justifying judicial intervention regarding an interlocutory decision

22. October 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Royal Canadian Mounted Police – Police – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Disciplinary proceedings – Notice – Judicial review application – Premature – Jurisdiction – Remedies – Alternative remedies Black v. Canada (Attorney General), [2013] F.C.J. No. 1001, 2013 FCA 201, Federal Court of Appeal, September ...

The Applicant, Mr. Dorn, unsuccessfully sought judicial review of a decision of the Respondent’s council. That decision said that his appeal of a discipline committee decision was on the record, and not a hearing de novo.

24. September 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Association of Professional Engineers – Rules and by-laws – Engineers – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Disciplinary proceedings – Hearings – Hearing de novo – Judicial review – Appeals – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Dorn v. Assn. of Professional Engineers ...

The Court of Appeal upheld the decision of of the Board of Directors of the Nurses Association of New Brunswick revoking the appellant’s membership and registration and setting terms for his re-application. The Court held that the lower court had given proper deference to the Directors’ decision, and that whether the appellant’s acts were done in good faith or not did not change the fact that they constituted professional misconduct.

27. August 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Association of Nurses – Nurses – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Penalties – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Doak v. Nurses Assn. of New Brunswick, [2013] N.B.J. No. 200, 2013 NBCA 45, New Brunswick Court of Appeal, July 11, ...

A lawyer was found by the Law Society Appeal Panel to have committed 43 particulars of professional misconduct in relation to 11 clients over a six year period. The penalty imposed on the lawyer, who had a mixed personality disorder with no clear prognosis, was the surrendering of her license with terms. The penalty was appealed to the Ontario Court of Justice but dismissed.

27. August 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Law Societies – Barristers and solicitors – Professional misconduct – Competence – Public interest – Disciplinary proceedings – Penalties and suspensions – Judicial review – Failure to provide reasons Bharadwaj v. Law Society of Upper Canada, [2013] O.J. No. 3252, 2013 ONSC 4329, Ontario Superior Court of ...

Physician appealed decision of College’s disciplinary committee, which concluded the physician engaged in disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional conduct, and reprimanded and revoked the physician’s certification

23. July 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Physicians and Surgeons – Disciplinary proceedings – Investigations – Competence – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Penalties and suspensions – Judicial review – Appeals – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Evidence – Procedural requirements and fairness Liberman v. ...

Judicial review of decision of adjudicator under Police Act reviewing disciplinary decision that found the officer breached the Charter but did not commit misconduct

23. July 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Police Commission – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Investigations – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Privative clauses – Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Search and seizure Lowe v. Diebolt, [2013] B.C.J. No. 1331, 2013 BCSC 1092, British Columbia Supreme Court, June ...

The appellant psychologist appealed a decision of the Saskatchewan College of Psychologists finding her guilty of professional misconduct for failing to comply with the College’s Code of Ethics and issuing a reprimand. The College’s Discipline Committee had rejected the joint submission by the psychologist and College’s counsel on agreed facts and undertakings, and instead issued an order as to the appellant psychologist’s future practice. The College Council upheld the Discipline Committee’s decision. The appeal was allowed in part. The Court agreed that the appellant psychologist’s admissions as to the facts behind the charges were tantamount to guilty pleas. The Council’s decision to uphold the findings of guilty pleas was within the range of reasonable decisions. However, the Discipline Committee and Council erred in its application of section 32 of the Psychologists Act in requiring a reprimand given in every case where there was a breach of professional standards. As well, the process of rejecting the joint submission without an opportunity for further submissions from either counsel for the College or appellant psychologist was unreasonable. As a result, the reprimand was struck from the disposition.

25. June 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Psychologists – Psychologists – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Penalties – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Nanson v. Saskatchewan College of Psychologists, [2013] S.J. No. 295, 2013 SKQB ...

An assessment which falls below the minimum standard of care required, but does not lead to a misdiagnosis, may lead to a finding of veterenarian’s unprofessional conduct

25. June 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Veterinary Associations – Veterinarians – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct – Competence – Judicial review – Evidence –  Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Karagic v. Alberta Veterinary Medical Assn., [2013] A.J. No. 481, 2013 ABCA 169, Alberta Court of Appeal, May 21, ...