Aaron Dantowitz

Following earlier findings of professional misconduct, the discipline panel conducted a penalty and costs hearing by videoconference.

The parties presented a joint submission seeking a reprimand, revocation of registration, a five-year bar on re-application or reinstatement, publication, and fixed costs.

The panel accepted the joint submission, holding that the proposed order served public protection, maintained confidence in professional regulation, and advanced specific and general deterrence.

The panel considered revocation appropriate for sexual abuse or sexual misconduct findings and approved agreed costs of $15,000 inclusive of HST.

The College of Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners and Acupuncturists of Ontario brought professional misconduct allegations against the member for failing to maintain proper records and submitting inaccurate records to an insurer.

The member admitted to using stock templates for initial assessments and treatment notes that did not reflect the actual condition of the patients, and failing to maintain proper appointment and billing records.

The Discipline Committee found the member committed professional misconduct, noting the conduct was unprofessional but not disgraceful or dishonourable as there was no evidence of deceit or dishonesty.

The panel accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, a one-month suspension, completion of an ethics course and record-keeping workshop, a reflective essay, up to three practice inspections, and $3,000 in costs.

In a professional discipline hearing, the member admitted misconduct arising from counselling a client with an acquired brain injury while lacking relevant competence, using abusive and demeaning communications, breaching confidentiality, and engaging in boundary violations and conflicts of interest through overlapping family representation and personal self-disclosure.

The Panel found the admitted facts established multiple breaches of the governing regulation, the Code of Ethics, and the Standards of Practice Handbook, and further found the conduct disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional.

Applying the public-interest approach to joint submissions, the Panel accepted the jointly proposed order.

The member was reprimanded, suspended for four months with one month remittable on compliance, made subject to remedial terms and education requirements, and ordered to pay $5,000 in costs.

The Member, a Traditional Chinese Medicine practitioner, admitted to professional misconduct for issuing false diplomas and transcripts to over 80 individuals through his academy, obstructing a College investigation, and submitting false transcripts for his own registration.

The Discipline Committee accepted an agreed statement of facts and a joint submission on penalty.

The Member was reprimanded, suspended for 24 months, permanently restricted from teaching or operating an academic institution related to the profession, ordered to complete an ethics course, and required to pay costs of $120,000 (reducible to $42,500 if paid early).

The College brought a motion for an indefinite adjournment of a discipline hearing against the member, who faced allegations of failing to keep records, falsifying records, and failing to obtain informed consent.

The motion was based on an Undertaking and Surrender Agreement in which the member agreed to resign, surrender her certificate of registration, never reapply, and pay $8,000 towards investigation costs.

The Discipline Committee found it in the public interest to grant the motion and adjourned the proceeding indefinitely.

In a professional discipline hearing, the panel found that a social work practicum student supervised by the member was a client within the meaning of the governing standards.

The panel accepted the student's evidence of repeated boundary violations, sexualized remarks, inappropriate personal conduct, and sexual touching occurring during and immediately after the placement relationship.

It held that the member failed to maintain professional boundaries, acted in a conflict of interest, and sexually abused a client within the statutory framework.

The panel further found the conduct dishonourable and unprofessional, though not disgraceful, and imposed a publication ban protecting the student's identity.

Discipline proceeding arising from admitted therapist-client boundary violations, including disclosures of romantic feelings, personal and romantic email and telephone communications, conflict of interest, and failure to clearly and promptly terminate the therapeutic relationship.

The panel held that the member's conduct constituted professional misconduct under the governing statute, regulation, and standards of practice, notwithstanding the absence of physical intimacy and the client's view that no harm occurred.

Applying the public-interest approach to joint submissions, the panel accepted the agreed penalty.

The order included a reprimand, a four-month suspension with one month remittable on compliance, practice supervision, ethics and boundaries education, publication, and $5,000 in costs.

The Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario (PEO) brought professional misconduct allegations against the respondent, an electrical engineer, after he submitted an 'alternative solution' under the Fire Code for a rental property he owned.

The respondent lacked the training and experience to prepare the alternative solution and had previously been convicted of a Fire Protection and Prevention Act offence for failing to comply with a Fire Safety Inspection Order.

The Discipline Committee accepted an Agreed Statement of Facts and found the respondent guilty of professional misconduct for undertaking work he was not competent to perform and for his provincial offence conviction.

The Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, a $2,500 fine, successful completion of the Professional Practice Examination within 18 months, and a 10-month suspension that would be suspended pending compliance with the examination requirement.

The appellant pharmacist appealed a penalty decision of the Discipline Committee of the Ontario College of Pharmacists.

The appellant admitted to professional misconduct involving false claims to the Ontario Drug Benefit Program.

The Discipline Committee imposed a penalty that included a three-year prohibition on the appellant having any proprietary interest in a pharmacy or acting as a director of a corporation that owned a pharmacy.

The appellant argued the Committee lacked authority to impose these conditions under the Health Professions Procedural Code and the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the Committee's interpretation of its broad remedial authority under s. 51(2)3 of the Code to protect the public interest was reasonable.

A discipline panel found a registered social worker guilty of professional misconduct after she admitted issuing two letters for use in family-court custody and access proceedings without proper authorization, adequate evidentiary foundation, or balanced disclosure to all clients.

The panel held that the member failed to reset counselling goals after the parents' separation, breached confidentiality, made false, misleading, inaccurate or improper statements, and provided custody-related recommendations without conducting the type of comprehensive assessment required for such opinions.

Applying the public-interest approach to joint submissions, the panel accepted a joint submission on penalty.

The order imposed a reprimand, a six-month suspension with one month remittable on compliance, practice conditions including an ethics course, therapy, supervision-related terms, publication, and $5,000 in costs.

The College alleged that the Member committed professional misconduct after he was found guilty in criminal court of two counts of sexual assault against a patient.

The Member did not attend the discipline hearing.

The Discipline Committee found that the Member committed professional misconduct by being found guilty of an offence relevant to his suitability to practise and by sexually abusing a patient.

The Committee ordered that the Member be reprimanded, his certificate of registration be revoked, he reimburse the College for patient therapy funding up to $16,060, and he pay costs of $28,299.90.

The College of Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners and Acupuncturists of Ontario brought allegations of professional misconduct against the member, including sexual abuse, performing unauthorized controlled acts (ozone injections), and failing to cooperate with an investigation.

The member did not attend the hearing.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of all allegations, concluding that he touched a patient's breasts and genitals without consent, administered unauthorized injections, and ignored a previous suspension order and investigator requests.

The College alleged that the members committed professional misconduct by charging an excessive fee for a traditional Chinese medicine remedy containing rhinoceros horn and by engaging in conduct unbecoming a practitioner.

The members admitted to the allegations.

The Discipline Committee accepted the agreed statement of facts and found the members guilty of professional misconduct.

The Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a two-month suspension (which could be remitted upon completion of coursework), a public reprimand, and $4,000 in costs.

The Member was previously found to have committed professional misconduct by making unsubstantiated claims, recommending treatment without diagnosis, and using prohibited titles.

At the penalty hearing, the Discipline Committee ordered a 14-month suspension, a public reprimand, and a practice reassessment if the Member returns to practice.

The Committee also ordered the Member to pay $60,000 in costs to the College, noting the seriousness of the misconduct and the Member's lack of insight and remorse.

The Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario (PEO) brought professional misconduct allegations against a member and his engineering firm regarding inaccurate heating and cooling load calculations for a residential solarium.

The member signed and sealed revised calculations prepared by a technician without checking them, resulting in a significantly undersized cooling unit.

The member admitted to the facts and pled guilty to professional misconduct for negligence and for sealing documents not actually prepared or checked by him.

The Discipline Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, publication without names, and successful completion of the Professional Practice Examination within 14 months, failing which a 10-month suspension would apply.

A pharmacist challenged the Ontario College of Pharmacists' jurisdiction to prosecute discipline charges after the College failed to comply with mandatory statutory timelines for processing a written complaint under section 25 of the Health Professions Procedural Code.

Instead, the College accepted the complainant's withdrawal and proceeded with a registrar-initiated investigation under section 75.

The Divisional Court quashed the charges, finding the College lost jurisdiction through non-compliance.

The Court of Appeal reversed, holding that written complaints may be withdrawn when the College agrees and the matter proceeds through another statutory process with full procedural safeguards.

The court balanced the public interest in regulating the profession against the accused member's fair hearing rights, finding no procedural unfairness or prejudice to the respondent.

The Member faced allegations of professional misconduct for issuing a false receipt for acupuncture services when the patient actually received massage therapy, and for failing to maintain a daily appointment log.

The Member admitted to the allegations.

The Discipline Committee found the Member committed professional misconduct and accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, a six-month suspension (three months suspended upon completion of conditions), coursework, a practice assessment, and $2,500 in costs.

The College of Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners and Acupuncturists of Ontario brought allegations of professional misconduct against the member, a registered TCM practitioner.

The allegations centered on the member's use of prohibited titles such as 'Master' and 'Grandmaster', claims of unauthorized specialization in Qigong for sexual dysfunction, and false or misleading advertising including the use of patient testimonials.

The member also claimed his Qigong treatments and a secret liquid mixed with patient urine could cure kidney and liver dysfunctions.

The Discipline Committee found that the member's Qigong practice fell within the College's jurisdiction and that he failed to adhere to the standards of practice.

All allegations of professional misconduct were proven.

The Discipline Committee held a penalty hearing after finding the Member committed professional misconduct, including sexual abuse of a patient.

The College sought mandatory revocation under the recent amendments to the Health Professions Procedural Code, while the Member argued for a 12-month suspension, asserting the amendments should not apply retrospectively.

The Committee found that the mandatory revocation amendment applied retrospectively because it fell within the public protection exemption.

The Committee ordered the revocation of the Member's certificate, a public reprimand, the posting of $16,060 for the victim's therapy, and $53,500 in costs.

The College brought a motion to stay discipline proceedings against the member, who was alleged to have committed professional misconduct.

The member signed an Undertaking and Surrender Agreement, agreeing to surrender his certificate of registration, never practice traditional Chinese medicine or acupuncture again in North America, and pay $750 towards investigation costs.

The Discipline Committee found it in the public interest to grant the motion and stayed the proceedings in accordance with the agreement.