Regulatory staff appear to be facing a pandemic of harassment by some of the practitioners that they regulate. Sometimes, but not always, this is accompanied
Regulators are being given increased authority to impose remediation to address concerns about a practitioner’s practice at the complaints screening stage. While there are concerns,
Interim suspensions (or other orders) during an investigation are always challenging for Courts to decide. Typically, they are challenged through an application for judicial review.
It is trite law that the burden of proof in discipline matters is on the regulator. However, this concept can be pushed too far. In
The highest court in British Columbia has upheld the broad scope of investigative powers for the legal regulator there. In A Lawyer v. The Law
A freeze order is a type of interim order made by a regulator preventing a person from dealing with their financial assets until a concern
Should a discipline hearing proceed even though a criminal trial on related allegations is pending? In Berko v. Ontario College of Pharmacists, 2021 ONSC 6120
It is difficult to sue a regulator for their investigations even if the resulting discipline hearing is resolved in the practitioner’s favour. The practitioner needs
The complaints screening process is not a discipline hearing, so complaints screening bodies should be careful not to make credibility findings as if it were
The Ontario Court of Appeal has formally considered its previous sexual abuse cases upholding revocation for frank acts of sex by health practitioners and patients.
To subscribe to Regulation Pro Blog, please enter your e-mail address below.
