New Evidence in Hearings
Hearings de novo are strange creatures of administrative law. In effect, they are a complete redoing of a prior administrative decision – by a different
Julie Maciura
June 3, 2022
Hearings de novo are strange creatures of administrative law. In effect, they are a complete redoing of a prior administrative decision – by a different
Regulators often insist on proper processes being followed. This occurred in Williams v. Health Professions Appeal and Review Board, 2022 ONSC 2217 (CanLII), https://canlii.ca/t/jnmm0. The
A core element of procedural fairness is permitting those affected by a decision to make submissions on the matter before the decision is made. However,
Can a disability constitute a substantive defence to an allegation of professional misconduct? Must discipline panels accommodate a disability when making findings? This issue came
When a Council or Board member of a regulator has a conflict of interest, is simply declaring the conflict sufficient? A recent municipal Council case
British Columbia’s major reform of the regulation for many non-health professions is being amended (https://www.leg.bc.ca/parliamentary-business/legislation-debates-proceedings/42nd-parliament/3rd-session/bills/first-reading/gov21-1). The Professional Governance Act has been in effect for just
If a regulator makes a flawed order, can the practitioner simply ignore it? Alberta’s highest court says “no”. In Alberta Securities Commission v Felgate, 2022
Courts sometimes allow third parties to participate (intervene) in proceedings in order to provide assistance to the Court. Many regulatory tribunals do so as well.
Recently we wrote about a civil case with implications for regulators. In Continental Bank of Canada v. Continental Currency Exchange Canada Inc., 2022 ONSC 647
Increasingly, regulators are being asked to deal with complaints that a practitioner made public statements without a reasonable basis for making them. Another example of