A physician (“Cimolai”) appealed from an Order dismissing his petition attempting to prohibit Children’s and Women’s Health Centre (“the Hospital”) from (1) proceeding under its human rights policy to investigate complaints against him made by another physician,(2) requiring the Hospital to reinstate him and (3) requiring them to pay him all of his lost benefits during the period of suspension in 2001

22. January 2008 0
Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Hospital privileges – Judicial review – Remedies – Alternative remedies – Human rights complaints – Harassment – Investigations – Procedural requirements and fairness – Report, adequacy of Cimolai v. Children’s and Women’s Health Centre of British Columbia, [2007] B.C.J. No. 2473, British Columbia Court of Appeal, November 22, ...

A cardiologist (“Dr. Rosenhek”) was successful in establishing an entitlement to damages arising out of a denial of natural justice in the revocation of his hospital privileges

22. January 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Hospital Appeal Board – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Hearing de novo – Physicians and surgeons – Hospital privileges – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice – Evidence – Damages Rosenhek v. Windsor Regional Hospital, [2007] O.J. No. 4486, Ontario Superior Court ...

An orthopaedic surgeon (Dr. Smyth) was successful in having the Court set aside a final Arbitration Ruling that had recommended a denial of his reappointment to the medical staff at the Perth and Smiths Falls District Hospital (the “Hospital”)

26. December 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Arbitration Board – Scope of arbitration agreement – Physicians and Surgeons – Hospital privileges – Judicial review – Jurisdiction Smyth v. Perth and Smiths Falls District Hospital, [2007] O.J. No. 4284, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, November 5, 2007, S.J. Kershman J. Dr. Smyth, an orthopaedic surgeon ...

A party wishing to bring an action for damages arising out of a hospital privileges issue must first proceed by way of a statutory route to establish the basis for sustaining the claim in damages. To permit Applicants to commence actions for damages on a hospital privileges issue without following the statutory process, would result in a system whereby a dissatisfied party would be able to bypass the specialised tribunal, a result that is not permitted under the Act.

Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Hospital privileges – Damages – Statutory provisions – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Appeal process – Compliance with legislation – Jurisdiction of court Beiko v. Hotel Dieu Hospital St. Catharines, [2007] O.J. No. 331, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, January 26, 2006, G.B. Morawetz J. The Plaintiffs brought an ...

The Applicant, Dr. Cimolai applied for an order setting aside an investigative report. Dr. Cimolai also sought an order to prohibit the Respondent Hospital from proceeding with a complaint against him, and for the Applicant’s reinstatement to his former position with the Hospital. The Court concluded that it would be premature to conduct a judicial review and dismissed the application.

28. November 2006 0
Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Hospital privileges – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Investigations – Judicial review application – Premature – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence – Witnesses – Compliance with legislation Cimolai v. Children’s and Women’s Health Centre of British Columbia, [2006] B.C.J. No. 2199, British Columbia Supreme Court, October 3, 2006, Cullen ...

The Court quashed the decision of the Respondent Health Authority to permanently revoke the Applicant doctor’s privileges on the basis that the Respondent’s Board of Directors failed to meet the requirements of procedural fairness by hearing evidence in the Applicant’s absence

Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Hospital privileges – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice Trinh v. Acadie-Bathurst Health Authority, [2005] N.B.J. No. 96, New Brunswick Court of Queen’s Bench, March 3, 2005, R. Léger J. The Applicant was a medical doctor and a member of the medical staff of the ...

The court held that the Capital District Health Authority (“Capital Health”) was not bound by a settlement agreement between the CEO of Capital Health and a cardiologist (“Dr. Horne”) with respect to Dr. Horne’s hospital privileges. The CEO had neither actual nor ostensible authority to enter into a settlement on behalf of Capital Health and Capital Health had no power to delegate authority with respect to medical staff privileges.

Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Hospital privileges – Health authorities – Statutory powers – Delegated authority – Settlements – Validity – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Jurisdiction – Procedural requirements and fairness Horne v. Capital District Health Authority, [2005] N.S.J. No. 85, Nova Scotia Supreme Court, February 23, 2005, D. Hall J. Dr. ...

An application was granted for an order of certiorari to quash a resolution of the Medical Advisory Committee of the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority that suspended the Applicant doctor’s medical staff privileges pending the outcome of a hearing into certain complaints against him. The Applicant’s privileges were re-instituted subject to certain conditions.

28. September 2004 0
Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Competence – Hospital privileges – Suspensions – Hearings – Judicial review – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness – Administrative decisions – Bias – Remedies – Certiorari – Injunctions Fong v. Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, [2004] M.J. No. 299, Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench, July 30, 2004, Beard J. The ...

An appeal pursuant to section 43 of the Public Hospitals Act was dismissed as the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board (the “HPARB”) was held to have understood its role and applied the proper tests, resulting in a conclusion that was reasonable. While there had been a denial of procedural fairness in that the Appellant was provided with a package of 17 complaints at a meeting without being afforded an opportunity to investigate and consider them, that denial was “corrected” when it was agreed by the parties to have the situation reviewed by an independent expert agreeable to both parties.

27. July 2004 0
Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Competence – Hospital privileges – Suspensions – Fairness – Public interest – Judicial review – Administrative decisions – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Soremekun v. University Health Network, [2004] O.J. No. 2085, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, May 18, 2004, MacFarland, Wilson and Swinton ...

A physician (“Dr. Cimolai”) successfully appealed the decision of a chambers judge dismissing his application for a judicial review of a decision of the Board of Directors of Children’s and Women’s Health Centre which had terminated his hospital privileges on the basis of the finding of harassment. The chambers judge had ruled that the doctor had available to him an “adequate alternative remedy” in the form of an appeal to the Hospital Appeal Board, and that for this reason he was not entitled to judicial review. The Court of Appeal disagreed with the findings of the chambers judge.

26. August 2003 0
Administrative law – Physicians and surgeons – Hospital privileges – Judicial review – Procedural fairness – Public body – Definition – Remedies – Certiorari Cimolai v. Children’s and Women’s Health Centre of British Columbia, [2003] B.C.J. No. 1313, British Columbia Court of Appeal, June 6, 2003, Southin, Newbury and Hall JJ.A. The Court of Appeal considered the question ...