Author: Bernie LeBlanc

Courts tend to be quite deferential to regulators when reviewing interim orders made to protect the public pending discipline. However, such an order was set

As regulators summarize complaints and discipline decisions for publication, practitioners often dispute the synopsis. This issue arose in an earlier version of Bill 87 where

In recent weeks there have been three separate initiatives by Ontario’s politicians to address conflicts of interest. Bill 160 would require drug manufacturers and makers

In Challans v Timms-Fryer, 2017 ONSC 1300, the complainant was a party to the discipline hearing of a police officer. There already was a regulatory

The Alberta Court of Appeal has reinforced a lower court ruling that, where relevant, a regulator can have access to a practitioner’s electronic devices even

Many lawsuits against regulators never make it to trial because the practitioner cannot demonstrate any basis to challenge the good faith of the regulator. In

To use diplomatic language, the case of R. v. Gashikanyi, 2017 ABCA 194 is an example of frank and vigorous debate within an appeal panel.

It is not enough for a complaints screening committee to say that the complaint does not raise a significant concern of professional misconduct. The committee

In BSA Diagnostics Imaging Inc. v The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, 2017 ONSC 1950, the Divisional Court upheld the legal authority of

Tribunals are cautious about refusing adjournment requests, particularly where there is no public risk in waiting to proceed later. In Broda v. Law Society of