Competence is Not a Defence

It is not a defence to an allegation of illegal practice that one provides excellent services.

In College of Dental Technologists v. Ahmed, 2024 ONSC 638 (CanLII), the Court ordered an individual to stop operating a dental laboratory contrary to the Regulated Health Professions Act. The individual submitted that they had operated legally for years until their supervising registered dental technologist left, that there had been no complaints about their work, that they limited their services to less elaborate services, and that registered persons reviewed their work before it was dispensed to patients. The Court held, based on the expert evidence of the regulator, that the individual was operating “a functioning dental laboratory engaged in the practice of dental technology” contrary to the law. The competence of the individual was irrelevant.

The order was made even though the Court accepted that the individual had stopped operating the laboratory. However, in all the circumstances, the Court did not award costs to the regulator despite its success on the application.

More Posts

AI in Adjudication

Two new guidelines from the Canadian Judicial Council advance the discussion on the use of AI by adjudicators. The Guidelines move beyond warning of the

Designing a Whistleblower Policy

Regulators are increasingly developing whistleblower (or safe reporting) policies. Typically, there is a separate policy for reporting on integrity concerns relating to regulatory staff, committee

Warning the Public

When regulators become aware that unregistered individuals may be performing restricted procedures or holding themselves out as registrants, they sometimes issue public notices. The notice