Anastasia-Maria Hountalas

The Registrar appealed a License Appeal Tribunal decision that declined to revoke the respondents' funeral director and establishment operator licences.

The respondent had previously pleaded guilty to stealing approximately $86,000 from a local charity to pay business debts.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error in the Tribunal's assessment that the respondent's conduct was out of character, that he had insight into his misconduct, and that public protection did not require revocation.

The Registrant, a dental hygienist, admitted to professional misconduct for making false chart entries to conceal that a colleague had provided dental hygiene services to the colleague's spouse.

The Discipline Committee accepted an Agreed Statement of Facts and found the Registrant committed professional misconduct, including falsifying records and acting in a conflict of interest.

The Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a two-month suspension, a reprimand, completion of an ethics course, and $5,000 in costs.

The Member faced allegations of professional misconduct for failing to comply with the College's Quality Assurance program, including failing to submit self-assessment forms and failing to participate in a peer and practice assessment.

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

The Discipline Committee found the Member engaged in professional misconduct.

The Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, a three-month suspension, terms and conditions on the Member's certificate of registration, and $4,000 in costs.

The College of Dental Hygienists of Ontario held a discipline hearing regarding allegations that the Registrant failed to comply with an order of the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee (ICRC) to attend an oral caution and complete an ethics course.

The Registrant also failed to cooperate with the College's subsequent investigation.

The Discipline Committee found that the College proved the allegations on a balance of probabilities and concluded that the Registrant committed professional misconduct, including disgraceful, dishonourable, unprofessional, and unbecoming conduct.

The Registrant, a dental hygienist, faced allegations of professional misconduct for assisting and receiving assistance from another registrant while completing an online Quality Assurance Test, contrary to the rules.

The hearing proceeded on an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission on Penalty and Costs.

The Discipline Committee found the Registrant committed professional misconduct.

The Committee accepted the joint submission, ordering a reprimand, a two-month suspension, completion of an ethics course, and $3,000 in costs.

The College of Dental Hygienists of Ontario brought allegations of professional misconduct against the Registrant for receiving and providing unauthorized assistance while completing an online Quality Assurance Test.

The hearing proceeded on an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission on Penalty and Costs.

The Discipline Committee found that the Registrant committed professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with the Quality Assurance Committee and engaging in disgraceful, dishonourable, or unprofessional conduct.

The Committee accepted the joint submission, ordering a reprimand, a two-month suspension, completion of an ethics course, and $3,000 in costs.

The appellant, a dental hygienist, appealed a discipline committee decision finding she engaged in a concurrent sexual relationship with a client, which resulted in the mandatory revocation of her certificate of registration.

The appellant argued the hearing was procedurally unfair due to an inadequate investigation, uneven scrutiny of evidence, and failure to enforce a witness exclusion order.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no procedural unfairness, noting the committee's credibility assessments were entitled to deference, and concluding the appellant failed to establish any palpable and overriding error.

The College of Dental Hygienists of Ontario and the respondent registrant presented a Joint Submission on Penalty and Costs following a finding of professional misconduct.

The proposed penalty included a reprimand, a two-month suspension, completion of an ethics course, and $5,000 in costs.

The Discipline Committee accepted the joint submission, finding it reasonable and in the public interest, as it appropriately addressed the principles of specific and general deterrence, public protection, and rehabilitation.

The Discipline Committee of the College of Dental Hygienists of Ontario held a hearing on penalty and costs regarding the respondent.

The parties presented a Joint Submission on Penalty and Costs, which included a reprimand, a two-month suspension, completion of an ethics course, and $5,000 in costs.

The Committee accepted the joint submission, finding it reasonable and in the public interest, as it addressed principles of specific and general deterrence, public protection, and rehabilitation.

The Discipline Committee held a hearing regarding penalty and costs for the registrant following a finding of professional misconduct.

The parties presented a Joint Submission on Penalty and Costs, which included a reprimand, a two-month suspension, completion of an ethics course, and $5,000 in costs.

The Committee accepted the joint submission, finding it reasonable and in the public interest, as it appropriately addressed the principles of specific and general deterrence, public protection, and rehabilitation.

The appellant veterinarian appealed decisions of the Discipline Committee finding he engaged in professional misconduct by dispensing and reselling veterinary drugs to pharmacies in large quantities, contrary to s. 33(2)(d) of the General Regulation under the Veterinarians Act.

The appellant challenged the validity of the regulation, arguing it was ultra vires, vague, overbroad, and improperly enacted without procedural fairness.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the regulation was validly enacted within the College's statutory authority and that the terms 'reasonably limited quantities' and 'temporary shortage' were not unconstitutionally vague.

The court upheld the finding of professional misconduct and the penalty of a one-month suspension, public reprimand, and costs, finding no palpable and overriding error.

The College of Massage Therapists of Ontario appealed a Divisional Court decision concerning a discipline committee order.

The appeal became moot when the respondent accepted the licence revocation.

The Court of Appeal declined to hear the appeal on its merits to set a judicial precedent, citing the absence of an adversarial context and the inappropriate use of judicial resources for an issue without practical consequences for both parties.

By consent, the Court reinstated the original order of the Discipline Committee.

The appellant, whose veterinary licence was previously revoked for professional misconduct, brought motions before the College of Veterinarians seeking to set aside the revocation on grounds of fraud and fresh evidence.

The Chair of the Discipline Committee refused to convene a panel, finding the Committee lacked jurisdiction to reconsider its earlier decision.

The appellant appealed to the Divisional Court.

The Court dismissed the appeal, holding it lacked jurisdiction because there was no statutory decision to appeal, and noted that even if treated as a judicial review, the Chair's refusal was reasonable given the complete lack of evidence supporting the allegations of fraud or fresh evidence.

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.

The appellant Registrar appealed a Divisional Court decision upholding a Licence Appeal Tribunal finding that the Registrar failed to establish reasonable grounds to believe the respondent funeral home's low-temperature alkaline hydrolysis operation posed a risk to public health and safety.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, agreeing that the onus was on the Registrar to prove the risk, not on the respondent to prove safety.

The Court found no error in the Tribunal's conclusion that the precautionary principle did not apply and that conditions should not be imposed on the business.

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.

The appellant, a registered massage therapist, appealed a decision of the Discipline Committee of the College of Massage Therapists of Ontario finding him guilty of sexual abuse and revoking his license.

The Divisional Court upheld the findings of fact and dismissed allegations of bias.

However, the Court found the Panel erred by applying 2017 mandatory revocation amendments retrospectively to 2014 conduct.

Finding permanent revocation disproportionate for a first-time offender under the prior discretionary regime, the Court substituted the revocation with a suspension ending on the date of judgment.

The Registrar appealed a Licence Appeals Tribunal decision setting aside a proposal to revoke the respondent's crematorium operator licence.

The respondent used a low-temperature alkaline hydrolysis process, which the Registrar argued posed a public health risk due to potential failure to destroy prions.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the Tribunal reasonably concluded the Registrar failed to establish reasonable grounds to believe the process created a risk to public health and safety.

The Court also found the Tribunal did not err in its application of the precautionary principle or in declining to impose further licence conditions.

The appellant appealed a decision of the Discipline Committee of the College of Veterinarians, which revoked his license to practice veterinary medicine and ordered him to pay costs of $160,000 for unprofessional conduct.

The appellant raised several grounds of appeal, including missing transcripts, failure to disclose documents held by a third party, and alleged bias of an expert witness.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the Committee's decision reasonable and noting that the appellant failed to bring a proper motion for third-party disclosure and consented to the expert's qualification.

Costs of the appeal were awarded to the respondent on a partial indemnity basis.