Regulators Can Insist on Proper Processes Being Followed

Regulators often insist on proper processes being followed. This occurred in Williams v. Health Professions Appeal and Review Board, 2022 ONSC 2217 (CanLII), https://canlii.ca/t/jnmm0. The issue in that case was whether the practitioner assessed the capacity of a patient before having them agree to a “Do Not Resuscitate” decision. The regulator imposed a remedial order because the practitioner had not conducted an assessment when there were numerous indications that the client may not have been capable. The practitioner challenged the decision on the basis that a client’s capacity can vary, that one can assume a client is capable unless there is reason to doubt it, and because the client did agree to the order. The Court upheld the remedial decision. The issue in dispute was not whether the client was capable at the time. Rather the issue was whether the were circumstances indicating that an assessment should be conducted before obtaining the instructions.

Insisting on practitioners following proper processes can be appropriate and justifiable.

More Posts

The Right to Rebut?

Many regulators frequently provide a copy of the registrant’s response to a complaint to the complainant for comment. Doing so can assist in providing the

Registration Runaround

A concern for regulators arises when applicants for registration, who are practicing elsewhere at the time, foresee disciplinary issues developing in their existing jurisdiction. A

Right-Touch Regulation Redux

Perhaps the most consequential document in professional regulation in the English-speaking world this century is Right-Touch Regulation published by the UK oversight body, the Professional

Reason Writing Omissions

Writing reasons for a regulatory decision is not easy, especially for non-lawyers. An administrative body’s reasons are the primary basis upon which a court will