Ahmad Mozaffari

The Ontario College of Teachers brought disciplinary proceedings against a principal who engaged in a pattern of inappropriate behaviour, including unwanted touching and inappropriate comments towards several young female students.

The Member had previously pleaded guilty to four counts of criminal assault related to this conduct.

Proceeding on an uncontested statement of facts and a joint submission on penalty, the Discipline Committee found the Member guilty of professional misconduct, including physical, verbal, and psychological abuse of students.

The Committee ordered that the Member be reprimanded and that his Certificate of Qualification and Registration be immediately revoked.

The College brought a motion to withdraw allegations of professional misconduct against the member.

The member had signed a Resignation, Undertaking and Acknowledgment, agreeing to resign immediately, never teach in Ontario again, and not seek reinstatement.

The Discipline Committee granted the motion, finding that the withdrawal of the allegations was reasonable and appropriate as the member's resignation and undertaking served to protect the public interest.

The Applicant applied for reinstatement of her certificate of registration, which had been revoked five years prior after a finding of sexual abuse of a patient.

The conduct involved treating her spouse before a spousal exemption was enacted.

The College did not oppose the application.

The Discipline Committee found the Applicant met the requirements for reinstatement, noting the low risk of reoffending and the current spousal exemption.

The application was granted, subject to the Applicant completing a refresher course.

The Member, a school principal, pleaded no contest to allegations of professional misconduct for failing to inform a teacher about threats made against her by a student.

The Discipline Committee found the Member guilty of professional misconduct, including failing to maintain proper order and discipline and engaging in conduct unbecoming a member.

The Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, a one-month suspension of the Member's Certificate of Qualification and Registration, and the successful completion of a course on relationships with colleagues and responsibilities of an education leader.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought disciplinary proceedings against the Member for professional misconduct, alleging physical and psychological abuse of five minor-aged referee trainees outside the school setting.

The Member had previously pled guilty to one count of assault under the Criminal Code for the same conduct, which involved inappropriate physical contact such as picking up the students and tickling their feet.

The Member admitted to the allegations and the parties presented an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission on Penalty.

The Discipline Committee found the Member guilty of professional misconduct.

Applying the public interest test from Anthony-Cook, the Committee accepted the joint submission, ordering a reprimand, a 10-month suspension of the Member's certificate, and the completion of a course on professional boundaries.

The College brought a motion seeking leave to withdraw the allegations against the member set out in a Notice of Hearing.

The member's case had already been dealt with by another Committee of the College, and the member consented to the withdrawal.

The Discipline Committee granted the motion, finding that the withdrawal was reasonable and served to protect the public interest.

The Member, a teacher, pled guilty to professional misconduct after being criminally convicted of possessing and accessing child pornography.

The Discipline Committee of the Ontario College of Teachers accepted an Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea, finding the Member guilty of professional misconduct, including engaging in a prohibited act involving child pornography.

Pursuant to the mandatory penalty provisions of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, the Committee ordered a written reprimand and the immediate revocation of the Member's certificate of qualification and registration.

The Member, an elementary school teacher, pleaded guilty to professional misconduct for engaging in a pattern of inappropriate communications and boundary violations with two female students.

Over several years, the Member sent hundreds of personal emails and messages, gave gifts with hidden messages, and failed to report concerns about a student's well-being.

The Discipline Committee found the Member guilty of failing to maintain professional standards, emotional abuse, and disgraceful conduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a reprimand and a six-month suspension, noting the Member had already resigned his teaching certificate and undertaken never to reapply.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a motion seeking leave to withdraw allegations of professional misconduct against the Member.

The Member had signed a Resignation, Undertaking and Acknowledgment, resigning his membership immediately and undertaking never to teach in Ontario again.

The Discipline Committee granted the motion, finding that the withdrawal of the allegations was reasonable and appropriate given the Member's resignation and undertaking, which served to protect the public interest.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought disciplinary proceedings against a member for professional misconduct.

The member pleaded no contest to allegations that he made inappropriate comments to students, exposed them to sexual remarks, and inappropriately used class time to show videos about serial killers.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct, including verbal abuse, psychological or emotional abuse, and sexual misconduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a reprimand, a five-month suspension of the member's certificate, and the completion of a course on maintaining appropriate boundaries.

The member, a teacher, faced allegations of professional misconduct for verbally and psychologically abusing students, failing to mark assignments, and making inappropriate comments about colleagues.

The member pleaded no contest to an agreed statement of facts detailing his use of profanity, physically intimidating behaviour, and failure to provide appropriate instruction.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a reprimand, a three-month suspension of the member's certificate, and the completion of coursework in classroom and anger management.

The Member, a teacher, pleaded guilty to professional misconduct for persistently asking a student to join his personal band, making inappropriate comments to students, and surreptitiously taking pictures of students and a colleague.

The Discipline Committee accepted an agreed statement of facts and joint submission on penalty, finding the Member guilty of verbal and psychological abuse, failing to maintain professional standards, and unprofessional conduct.

The Member was reprimanded, suspended for three months, and ordered to complete a course on professional boundaries before returning to teaching.

The Member, a teacher, faced allegations of professional misconduct for making racist, insensitive, and sexual comments to students, particularly international students.

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

The Discipline Committee found the Member guilty of professional misconduct, including verbal and psychological abuse, and sexual misconduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a reprimand, a five-month suspension of the Member's teaching certificate, and the successful completion of a course on classroom communication and sensitivity.

The plaintiffs, property developers, brought a motion for leave to amend their statement of claim to add three new defendants and plead conspiracy and oppression regarding allegedly inflated billings for deficiency work.

The proposed defendants opposed the motion, arguing the claims were statute-barred under the Limitations Act, 2002.

The court granted the motion, finding the plaintiffs had exercised reasonable diligence in investigating the billing discrepancies and raised a triable issue regarding discoverability.

The court held that the proposed amendments disclosed a reasonable cause of action and would not cause undue prejudice.

Staff of the Ontario Securities Commission sought a reciprocal order under s. 127(10) of the Securities Act against the respondents, who were previously found by the British Columbia Securities Commission to have perpetrated a fraud.

The BCSC found that the respondents raised millions from investors without disclosing severe cash flow problems and misused funds raised for foreclosure investments.

The OSC granted the reciprocal order, permanently banning the respondents from trading, acquiring securities, and acting as directors or officers in Ontario, with limited carve-outs allowing the individual respondents to trade in their personal accounts and act as directors of solely-owned private issuers.

The plaintiffs in two related actions brought motions for the production of information by the corporate defendants under the Business Corporations Act.

The parties settled the motions 'except for costs' and filed written costs submissions.

The plaintiffs sought substantial indemnity costs, arguing the motions were unnecessary as the defendants ultimately consented to the relief sought.

The court declined to award costs, holding that costs generally should not be awarded when parties settle 'except for costs.' The court reasoned that determining costs in such circumstances would require a hypothetical adjudication of the merits, which is an inefficient use of judicial resources and runs counter to the principle that costs are an incident of the determination of rights, not the subject matter of the dispute itself.

The applicants sought an order under the oppression remedy provisions of the OBCA to force the sale of the respondents' shares in a jointly owned corporation, alleging an irreconcilable relationship breakdown and corporate deadlock.

The applicants also sought a winding up of related corporations.

The court found that the applicant, who was the sole director and officer, continued to operate the business successfully and had manufactured the alleged deadlock to circumvent a contractual moratorium on a shotgun buy-sell provision.

The application was dismissed as the court found no oppressive conduct and no justification for a just and equitable winding up.