The applicants sought a declaration that Ontario opticians could lawfully dispense corrective eyewear using a business model in which an onsite refractive test would be faxed to a remote optometrist or ophthalmologist who had not examined the customer, and who would then issue a prescription.
The court held the applicants failed to establish the legality of the model, accepting that the combined statutory scheme and professional standards governing opticians, physicians, and optometrists precluded dispensing based on a prescription issued without examination of the customer.
The court further held that, even if the model were legally permissible, declaratory relief should be refused because the application was based on hypothetical facts, no actual lis existed, and the court should not intervene in an unresolved policy debate concerning refractive testing regulation.
The application was dismissed with costs to the respondent fixed at $23,000 inclusive, and the intervenors bore their own costs.
