Issuing an interim order restricting or suspending a registrant’s ability to practise pending an investigation is an exceptional power for regulators of professions. Given the
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.
It is a general principle that where a legislative scheme provides a route to challenge a regulatory decision, that route must be followed. For example,
While courts give leeway to the sanction imposed by discipline panels, they will intervene in exceptional circumstances, particularly where the order appears to be disproportionate.
In legislation, the word “may” sometimes means “must”. In Vey v Newfoundland and Labrador Pharmacy Board, 2022 NLCA 55 (CanLII) the registrant was disciplined for
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
Regulated individuals often argue that a regulator’s conduct (or inaction) amounts to an abuse of process. However, the doctrine applies equally to regulated individuals. In
Mark September 14, 2022, as the beginning of serious reform of the regulation of legal services. On that date, the Ministry of the Attorney General
In September, the UK regulatory oversight body released a major report on recommended reforms to the regulation of health and social work professions. There is
To obtain the best possible services, clients need to be forthcoming and candid with their service providers. For that reason, there is a strong duty