Alice Cranker

The appellant appealed a decision of the Discipline Committee Panel of the College of Physicians and Surgeons finding him guilty of professional misconduct for allegedly sexually touching a patient thirty years earlier.

The appellant argued the Panel's reasons were conclusory and insufficient for meaningful appellate review.

The Divisional Court agreed, finding the reasons failed to demonstrate justification, transparency, and intelligibility, particularly regarding the rejection of the appellant's evidence and the treatment of inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence.

The appeal was allowed, the finding set aside, and the matter remitted for a new hearing.

The appellant physician appealed a four-month suspension imposed by the Discipline Committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario.

The suspension resulted from the appellant's failure to maintain a narcotics log, which breached an undertaking he had provided to the College following previous disciplinary concerns regarding his prescribing practices.

The Divisional Court applied a reasonableness standard of review and found that the penalty was within the range of reasonable outcomes, emphasizing the importance of undertakings to the self-regulatory scheme and the need for general and specific deterrence.

The appeal was dismissed.