James Amson

The defendants, Hafiz M. Ahmad and Orbit Engineering Limited, brought a motion for the production of various electronic documents and their metadata from several third parties and the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario.

The Discipline Committee granted the motion in part, ordering several third parties to provide the requested documents in their native electronic format with metadata by a specified date.

The Committee also ordered the Association to make best efforts to provide any expert reports it intended to rely on at the upcoming hearing.

The Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario (PEO) brought a discipline proceeding against a professional engineer and his firm regarding the design and permitting of a replacement residential sewage system.

The respondents admitted to professional misconduct for failing to complete contracted services, failing to submit permit applications in a timely manner, failing to adequately explain requirements to the client, and falsely advising the client that applications had been submitted.

The Discipline Committee accepted an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission as to Penalty.

The respondents were reprimanded, the engineer was ordered to successfully complete the National Professional Practice Examination within 14 months, and the findings were ordered to be published.

The Member faced disciplinary proceedings for professional misconduct related to signing and sealing substandard structural drawings for a greenhouse at a healthcare facility, and for providing engineering services in Ontario without a Certificate of Authorization.

The Member admitted to the allegations in an Agreed Statement of Facts.

The Discipline Committee accepted the joint submission on penalty, finding that the Member's actions were dishonourable and unprofessional, and posed a risk to the public.

The Committee revoked the Member's licence and ordered summary publication of the decision.

The Discipline Committee determined the penalty for a professional engineer and his company found guilty of professional misconduct for negligently designing a solar tracking device prototype outside his area of competence.

The Committee ordered a reprimand, a one-month licence suspension, a permanent restriction limiting his practice to mechanical engineering, successful completion of the Professional Practice Examination, publication of the decision with names, and $2,000 in costs.

The Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario alleged that the member and his company committed professional misconduct in the design of a solar tracking device prototype.

The prototype experienced multiple structural failures after installation due to inadequate wind load calculations.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct for negligence, failing to safeguard life and property, undertaking work outside his competence, and unprofessional conduct, noting he was a mechanical engineer with no prior experience designing solar rack structures.

The respondents, a professional engineer and his engineering firm, faced allegations of professional misconduct relating to the design of an industrial lifting device.

The respondents admitted to signing and sealing deficient drawings that failed to adequately account for welded connections, lacked necessary construction details, omitted a maximum capacity nameplate, improperly specified a ratchet strap, and failed to apply appropriate structural engineering standards.

The Discipline Committee accepted an Agreed Statement of Facts and found the respondents guilty.

Based on a joint submission, the Committee ordered a reprimand, a six-week licence suspension, a restriction requiring direct supervision by another professional engineer, and publication of the decision.

The member and his engineering firm faced discipline for professional misconduct related to the structural design and post-construction review of a post and beam house.

The member admitted to preparing deficient structural drawings that failed to comply with the Ontario Building Code and to issuing a false review letter stating that periodic site reviews had been conducted when they had not.

The Discipline Committee accepted an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission as to Penalty, finding the member guilty of professional misconduct.

The panel ordered a reprimand, publication of the decision without names, and a requirement for the member to successfully complete the Professional Practice Examination within 14 months, failing which his licence would be suspended.