Main Menu
Twitter Linkedin

Sentencing Considerations for Contempt of Court for Holding Out and Use of Title

In College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia v Ezzati, 2020 BCSC 339, http://canlii.ca/t/j5s7k the Court had to decide what sentence to impose on an unregistered person who held themselves out as able to practise medicine and used protected titles such as “physician” and “Doctor”. The Court identified the following factors as relevant to that decision:

  1. the gravity of the offence (in this case disregarding a court order);
  2. the need to deter the offender;
  3. the past record and character of the offender (e.g., is this a first finding);
  4. the need to protect the public from the offender’s conduct;
  5. the ability of the offender to pay a fine; and
  6. the “extent to which the breach was flagrant and wilful and intended to defy the court’s authority”.

In applying those considerations to the conduct of this individual, the Court imposed a fine of $5,000.

More Posts

The Right to Rebut?

Many regulators frequently provide a copy of the registrant’s response to a complaint to the complainant for comment. Doing so can assist in providing the

Registration Runaround

A concern for regulators arises when applicants for registration, who are practicing elsewhere at the time, foresee disciplinary issues developing in their existing jurisdiction. A

Right-Touch Regulation Redux

Perhaps the most consequential document in professional regulation in the English-speaking world this century is Right-Touch Regulation published by the UK oversight body, the Professional

Reason Writing Omissions

Writing reasons for a regulatory decision is not easy, especially for non-lawyers. An administrative body’s reasons are the primary basis upon which a court will