A “Successful” Trip to Court
Regulators are often taken to court. One measure of success is where the regulator is vindicated on every legal ground raised. By that measure, the
Rebecca Durcan
September 9, 2026
Regulators are often taken to court. One measure of success is where the regulator is vindicated on every legal ground raised. By that measure, the
A recent Divisional Court decision provides a useful overview of the principles that apply to regulators wanting to restrain unregistered individuals from engaging in unauthorized
When it comes to crafting discipline sanctions, there is no simple formula – especially for determining the length of a suspension or the duration of
Courts have repeatedly indicated that guidelines can assist regulators when they are exercising discretion. Guidelines can ensure that decision-makers are reminded of the considerations that
At some point for most professions, rudeness can cross the line from simply being unseemly to constituting professional misconduct. For lawyers advocating fearlessly on behalf
The importance of addressing the significant issues raised when screening complaints was reinforced in Sarpong v Law Enforcement Complaints Agency, 2026 ONSC 3525 (CanLII). There,
Most regulators are not liable for damages unless they act in bad faith. The rationale for this qualified immunity is to enable regulators to avoid
In Real Estate Council of Alberta v More, 2026 ABKB 459 (CanLII), the regulator received several complaints about a former registrant’s conduct which raised serious
In Bacchus v. Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario, 2026 ONSC 3415 (CanLII), the registrant appealed a discipline panel’s decision on the basis that
Some regulators have whistleblower policies. Most commonly, they are for internal use as a safeguard to ensure that the regulator and its leadership are conducting