Author: Bernie LeBlanc

A number of regulators have developed rules of procedure that permit a practitioner to decline to admit allegations against them (i.e., making a plea of

We appreciate that there are few phrases in the regulatory world that are as frustrating as “it depends”. For example, take the question of whether

In recent years courts have become more proactive in screening out vexatious or abusive proceedings. For example, in Skrypichayko v Law Society of Alberta, 2020

Given the strict judicial scrutiny of delays in criminal cases, regulators have been wondering whether those principles would creep into the professional discipline arena. Saskatchewan’s

Regulators, by their public nature, have to be prepared to accept criticism; even unfair criticism. Indeed, Courts have the power to prevent regulatory authorities from

Under the new standard of review of tribunal decisions, findings of fact are reviewed on the basis of whether there was a palpable and overriding

Tribunal members are given some leeway to question witnesses. Questions clarifying the evidence of a witness or even asking for additional explanation on a point

There are some cases in which many issues are raised and dealt with. Multiple points of learning on a diversity of topics can arise. Houghton

A recent decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal has provided additional guidance about making findings on credibility. In R. v Esquivel-Benitez, 2020 ONCA 160,

How should a regulator respond to a practitioner making repeated public accusations that it is acting with dishonesty and bad faith and was abusing its