Regulators need to consider the freedom of expression rights of their registrants. However, regulators can infringe on those rights in a proportionate manner to achieve
For the most part, regulators give registrants some leeway in managing their billing practices, viewing them as a civil matter. However, where the billing is
In recent years, regulators have more frequently addressed offensive behaviour towards colleagues and coworkers as serious professional misconduct. For example, in Ontario College of Veterinarians
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
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