Welcome to the Regulation Pro Blog. SML’s blog contains brief discussions of court decisions and other developments in professional regulation, with one or two new posts per week. Explore our catalogue below or on CanLII.
Please note that the information contained in Regulation Pro is not intended to be legal advice and is not intended to be acted upon. The information contained herein is intended for general information and educational purposes only.
Has Vavilov Made a Difference?
The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65 (CanLII), [2019] 4 SCR 653 fundamentally altered
Police Check Requirements
Many regulators require applicants for registration (and sometimes even current registrants) to obtain a police check to ensure their suitability to practise the profession. A
Uncontested Submissions of Counsel
Ontario’s Divisional Court has again affirmed the deference shown towards disciplinary decisions on sanction (penalty). In Ontario (College of Pharmacists) v. Mourid, 2023 ONSC 1221
Procedural Fairness When Screening Complaints
There seems to be a flurry of cases recently on the procedural fairness requirements for committees that investigate and screen complaints. The most recent offering
Ideological, Cultural and Linguistic Discrimination
Ever since the mathematics proficiency test for Ontario teacher candidates was found to be discriminatory for racialized (and other, e.g., candidates whose first language was
Prejudice Not Required To Refuse an Adjournment
Refusing an adjournment is a tricky business for a regulator. Where a reviewing court determines that the adjournment should have been granted, the resulting hearing
Reconciling Open Court with Confidential Health Information
Courts have emphasized the importance of open hearings to Canadian society, which transparency includes prompt access to hearing exhibits. That public access sometimes results in
Adequate Investigations
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
Quickly Correcting Missteps
Where a tribunal makes a procedural error, prompt correction can permit the hearing to continue without immediate challenge. In Hemminger v. Law Society of British