Main Menu
Twitter Linkedin

Sentencing Considerations for Contempt of Court for Holding Out and Use of Title

In College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia v Ezzati, 2020 BCSC 339, http://canlii.ca/t/j5s7k the Court had to decide what sentence to impose on an unregistered person who held themselves out as able to practise medicine and used protected titles such as “physician” and “Doctor”. The Court identified the following factors as relevant to that decision:

  1. the gravity of the offence (in this case disregarding a court order);
  2. the need to deter the offender;
  3. the past record and character of the offender (e.g., is this a first finding);
  4. the need to protect the public from the offender’s conduct;
  5. the ability of the offender to pay a fine; and
  6. the “extent to which the breach was flagrant and wilful and intended to defy the court’s authority”.

In applying those considerations to the conduct of this individual, the Court imposed a fine of $5,000.

More Posts

Designing a Whistleblower Policy

Regulators are increasingly developing whistleblower (or safe reporting) policies. Typically, there is a separate policy for reporting on integrity concerns relating to regulatory staff, committee

Warning the Public

When regulators become aware that unregistered individuals may be performing restricted procedures or holding themselves out as registrants, they sometimes issue public notices. The notice

Relying on Police Evidence

Police have extraordinary powers to obtain evidence of a suspected crime. However, the judicial scrutiny of the exercise of that authority is correspondingly rigorous. Issues

Correctly Clarifying Changes

Many regulators rely on third-party organizations to assess a candidate’s credentials for registration. Regulators then need to ensure that the accreditation body makes defensible decisions.