When a medical regulator imposes restrictions on the registration of an anesthesiologist following adverse events, including concerns about inattention to patients and possible fabrication of
Once a matter has been referred to discipline, how much leeway does the regulator have to reword the allegations? That issue arose in Moodley v.
Registrants enjoy a constitutional freedom of expression. However, there are limitations imposed on those freedoms by virtue of the person’s professional status. Certain expressions are
As noted in the August issue of Grey Areas, many regulators are still in the early stages of learning how to engage with anti-Indigenous racism.
Entering into an undertaking with a regulator does not constitute a binding conclusion to all future concerns. That is the message from Binance Holdings Limited
Most of the attention in media and legal circles about the Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision in the Lauzon case will focus on the concept of judicial
As the “culture wars” become more frequent in Canada, regulatory Boards (sometimes called Councils) will not be immune from challenges to its authority. Difficult decisions
Regulators often enforce their registrants’ duty to assist with investigations by disciplining them for non-cooperation. However, regulators with a provision in their enabling legislation authorizing
Courts give deference to the credibility findings of discipline panels and will only interfere where there is palpable and overriding error. One form of palpable
Courts give significant deference to the investigative choices of regulators. However, twice in just over one month, Ontario’s Divisional Court has found a regulator’s investigation