Regulators investigate complaints. Many regulators investigate a lot of complaints. A recurring issue is how thorough those investigations need to be. Courts have repeatedly said
Can a registrant rely on mitigating factors that they earlier argued do not exist? That issue arose in College of Early Childhood Educators v. Phillips,
Committees that screen complaints and investigations do not make findings of wrongdoing or impose disciplinary sanctions. As such, a lower degree of procedural fairness is
While the Board of a regulatory body is quite different from a municipal Council, some analogies can be made in terms of their governance responsibilities.
If a registrant faces a serious allegation, should they be able to achieve a reduced sanction by obstructing the investigation? In Chimistes (Ordre professionnel des)
Complaints screening committees, unlike true adjudicative committees, sometimes directly engage in negotiations with registrants. For example, they might propose a remedial disposition, the acceptance of
The concept of “incompetence” on the part of a practitioner (“registrant”) for the purposes of disciplinary action has not been frequently discussed by the courts.
Discipline sanctions must not be clearly unfit (at least in contested cases; a different test applies where there is a joint submission on penalty). In
In Alberta Securities Commission v Hennig, 2021 ABCA 411 (CanLII), https://canlii.ca/t/jl93g, Alberta’s highest court took a narrow view as to when disciplinary sanctions of a
A recent Alberta case reaffirms that regulators with the authority to compel information from registrants can require a registrant to give the regulator a copy
To subscribe to Regulation Pro Blog, please enter your e-mail address below.
