The Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Divisional Court, confirmed that employees have an evidentiary onus to prove a prima facie case of discrimination before the burden shifts to the employer to provide a credible and rational explanation that its actions were not discriminatory

27. August 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Tribunal – Human rights complaints – Discrimination – Harassment – Disability – Sexual orientation – Hearings – Judicial review – Evidence Walton Enterprises v. Lombardi, [2013] O.J. No. 3306, 2013 ONSC 4218, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, July 11, 2013, A.M. Molloy, K.E. Swinton and ...

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. ...

The issue in this appeal was whether serious criminal charges, prior to conviction, can found a refusal to grant registration to a medical student

25. June 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Physicians and Surgeons – Physicians and Surgeons – Professional governance and discipline – Licence to practice – Character evidence – Competence – Public interest – Judicial review – Evidence – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Chauhan v. Heath Professions Appeal ...

Failure to engage in recommended rehabilitation activities can lead to a suspension of a worker’s compensation benefits

25. June 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers Compensation – Benefits – Statutory provisions – Suspension of benefits – Judicial review – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Williams v. New Brunswick (Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission), [2013] N.B.J. No. 133, 2013 NBCA 32, New Brunswick Court ...

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, ...

The Ontario Provincial Police appealed the decision of the Civilian Police Commission which overturned a Hearing Officer’s decision to dismiss the respondent, Constable C.S. Purbrick. The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the Commission’s decision on the basis that its decision finding numerous inadequacies with the Hearing Officer’s decision was reasonable in the circumstances. The Court also found the penalties imposed by the Commisssion to be reasonable.

28. May 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Police Commission – Police – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Disciplinary proceedings – Penalties and suspensions – Judicial review – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Ontario (Provincial Police) v. Purbrick, [2013] O.J. No. 1821, 2013 ONSC 2276, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, April ...

The appellant sought to have a decision of the Saskatchewan Registered Nurses’ Association reversed on the basis that its failure to grant the appellant an adjournment constituted a breach of procedural fairness and a denial of natural justice. The Court allowed the appeal, noting that the public protection aspect of a speedy hearing was not a factor as the appellant was no longer working as a registered nurse, and that the serious consequences of the hearing warranted the appellant the right to be heard.

28. May 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Nurses’ Association – Nurses – Professional misconduct / conduct unbecoming – Investigations – Disciplinary proceedings – Public interest – Hearings – Adjournment of hearing – Judicial review – Disclosure of records – Evidence – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness Pittman v. Saskatchewan Registered Nurses’ Assn. ...

An individual who was arrested for disruptive behaviour in an Ontario courtroom (“Penner”) succeeded on appeal in establishing that issue estoppel should not apply to preclude his civil claims against the police officers once his Police Services Act proceedings against them had been dismissed

21. May 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Police Services Commission – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming – Judicial review – Estoppel and res judicata – Compliance with legislation – Evidence Penner v. Niagara (Regional Police Services Board), 2013 SCJ No. 19, 2013 SCC 19, Supreme Court of Canada, April ...

The Appellant, Mr. Alexander, was not successful in his appeal of a disciplinary hearing conducted by the Respondent Securities Commission

23. April 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Securities Commission – Stock brokers – Disciplinary proceedings – Investigations – Penalties and suspensions – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter British Columbia (Securities Commission) v. Alexander, [2013] B.C.J. No. ...

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal by the College of Pharmacists of British Columbia from a decision of a chambers judge on an application for judicial review. The Appeal Court found that the chambers judge erred in remitting a matter back to the College’s Discipline Committee for rehearing solely on the issue of penalty and not on the merits in circumstances where the judge found the respondent pharmacist’s admissions to be equivocal. Having found that the admissions of professional misconduct were equivocal and therefore could not be relied upon, the chambers judge ought to have considered whether a new hearing or admission of further evidence was necessary in the interest of justice. As a result, the appeal was allowed and the question of liability on the two counts of professional misconduct was remitted back to the Disciplinary Committee of the College of Pharmacists.

23. April 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – College of Pharmacists – Pharmacists – Professional misconduct or condut unbecoming – Disciplinary proceedings – Penalties – Public interest – Judicial review – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Evidence Farbeh v. College of Pharmacists of British Columbia, [2013] B.C.J. No. 483, 2013 BCCA 59, British Columbia ...