Christine L. Lonsdale

The appellant union brought a defamation action against the respondents over a television broadcast and newspaper column suggesting the union supported terrorism and Hamas.

The trial judge found the statements defamatory but dismissed the action, upholding the defences of fair comment, responsible communication, and statutory privilege.

On appeal, the Court of Appeal affirmed the trial judge's findings, concluding that the statements were recognizable as opinions based on known facts, could be honestly held, and were not made with malice.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellant, a teacher, appealed a penalty decision of the Discipline Committee of the Ontario College of Teachers that revoked her teaching certificate for professional misconduct related to off-duty social media posts.

The appellant argued the penalty ignored her Charter right to freedom of expression.

The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, finding that the Discipline Committee committed a fatal error of law by failing to conduct a proper Doré analysis regarding the Charter implications of disciplining the appellant for her speech.

The matter was remitted back for a fresh hearing before a differently constituted panel.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought disciplinary proceedings against an occasional teacher for numerous incidents of professional misconduct across multiple schools.

The allegations included failing to supervise students, barricading a classroom door, grabbing a student by the arm, and making disparaging comments to students.

The Discipline Committee found that the College proved the allegations on a balance of probabilities.

The Committee concluded that the member's actions constituted physical, verbal, and psychological abuse, and a failure to maintain the standards of the profession.

A penalty hearing was scheduled for a later date.

The Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW) sued Quebecor Media Inc., Sun Media Corporation, TVA Group Inc., Jerry Agar, and Avi Benlolo for defamation.

The claim arose from statements published in print and broadcast media in 2014, alleging that CUPW and its members were terrorist sympathizers and supported Hamas, following a demonstration where CUPW flags were seen near a Hamas flag.

The court addressed CUPW's standing as an unincorporated association to sue for defamation, finding it had standing.

The court then examined the defamatory meaning of the impugned statements and the defendants' defences of truth, fair comment, responsible communication, and statutory privilege.

The court found that the defendants successfully established the defence of fair comment, as their opinions were honestly held and based on a sufficient factual substratum, and also discharged their duty of responsible communication and statutory privilege.

The action was dismissed with costs.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a discipline proceeding against a member for professional misconduct involving multiple students over several academic years.

The member made disparaging and intimidating remarks to students, humiliated a student with special needs, and failed to maintain appropriate professional boundaries by hugging students and engaging in inappropriate physical contact.

The member pled no contest to the allegations.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct, including verbal and psychological abuse, and conduct unbecoming a member.

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

The member was previously found guilty of professional misconduct for fraudulently claiming sick leave and receiving salary and benefits from his school board while working in another country.

At the penalty hearing, which the member did not attend, the Discipline Committee found the member to be ungovernable due to the nature of his prolonged fraudulent conduct, his failure to reimburse the school board, his lack of remorse, and his complete failure to cooperate with the College's disciplinary process.

The Committee ordered the immediate revocation of the member's Certificate of Qualification and Registration, a written reprimand, and costs of $15,000 payable to the College.

The member was found guilty of professional misconduct for frequently yelling at students, failing to manage his classroom, and making inappropriate comments.

He did not attend the penalty hearing.

The Discipline Committee ordered a reprimand, a four-month suspension of his Certificate of Qualification and Registration, and required him to complete a course on classroom management before returning to teaching.

The Committee also ordered the member to pay $5,000 in costs due to his lack of cooperation, which unnecessarily lengthened the proceedings.

The appellant contested the denial of statutory accident benefits following a 2010 automobile accident, bringing simultaneous proceedings before the Divisional Court by way of statutory appeal on questions of law and judicial review on questions of fact and mixed fact and law.

The courts below held that, where there is a limited statutory right of appeal, judicial review should only be exercised in exceptional or rare cases.

The Supreme Court of Canada held this was an error: a circumscribed statutory right of appeal on questions of law does not restrict the availability of judicial review on questions of fact or mixed fact and law, and the Strickland framework does not support imposing a heightened threshold for judicial review in such circumstances.

The Court further found that the LAT adjudicator's reconsideration decision was unreasonable because he failed to consider the effect of the reinstatement of income replacement benefits on the validity of the initial denial and failed to have regard to relevant tribunal jurisprudence on the point.

The appeal was allowed and the matter remitted to the LAT adjudicator for reconsideration.

The plaintiff, Tyler Dufault, moved for court approval of a class action settlement against The Toronto-Dominion Bank and The Canada Trust Company concerning the practice of charging multiple non-sufficient funds (NSF) fees on re-presented pre-authorized debits.

The proposed settlement included an all-inclusive payment of $15.9 million, direct distribution of funds to eligible class members, and non-monetary changes to the defendants' NSF fee disclosure and reversal policies.

The court approved the settlement, finding it fair, reasonable, and in the best interests of the class, noting the high take-up rate due to direct distribution and the significant non-monetary benefits.

The court also approved class counsel's fees and disbursements, third-party funder fees, and a $10,000 honorarium for the representative plaintiff.

The member was found to have engaged in professional misconduct during the 2017-2018 academic year by frequently yelling at students, failing to manage his class, failing to intervene when students watched pornography or roughhoused, and making inappropriate comments.

The Discipline Committee ordered a reprimand, a four-month suspension of the member's Certificate of Qualification and Registration, and imposed terms, conditions, or limitations requiring the successful completion of a pre-approved course on classroom management.

The member was also ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the College.

The applicant, a teacher, sought judicial review of the Investigation Committee of the Ontario College of Teachers' decisions not to refer his complaints against three colleagues to the Discipline Committee.

The complaints related to a school play about bullying and violence that the applicant claimed triggered a traumatic response.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding that the applicant lacked standing to challenge the substantive reasonableness of the decisions, as complainants in professional discipline cases generally only have standing for procedural fairness issues.

The court further held that the process was procedurally fair and the committee's decisions were reasonable.

The applicant, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers, sought judicial review of a decision by the College's Discipline and Fitness to Practise Committees to amend their rule regarding third-party record production to align with R. v. Mills.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding that the applicant lacked both private and public interest standing as he was not currently subject to any proceedings where the rule would apply.

Furthermore, the Court held that even if standing were established, the Committees' decision to update the rule was reasonable and within their statutory authority.

The Discipline Committee of the Ontario College of Teachers held a penalty hearing for a member previously found guilty of professional misconduct.

The member had failed to participate in a mandatory performance review, arrived late or not at all for duties, failed to provide lesson plans, assigned grades without proper assessments, and shouted at a student.

The member did not participate in the disciplinary process.

The Committee ordered a reprimand, an eight-month suspension, and terms and conditions requiring the successful completion of a course on the Standards of Practice for the Teaching Profession.

The Committee also ordered the member to pay $10,000 in costs to the College due to her uncooperative conduct which unnecessarily lengthened the proceedings.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a discipline proceeding against a member for professional misconduct during his time as a short-term occasional teacher.

The College alleged that the member frequently yelled at students, failed to manage his class, allowed students to leave unsupervised, failed to intervene when students roughhoused or looked at pornography, and made inappropriate comments.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct, concluding that he verbally abused students, failed to adequately supervise them, and engaged in disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional conduct.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought disciplinary proceedings against a school principal who wore a racialized student's shaved hair as a wig on two occasions, including as part of a Halloween costume.

The member pleaded guilty to professional misconduct, admitting his actions demonstrated a lack of cultural sensitivity and respect.

The Discipline Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, finding the member's conduct violated ethical standards and his obligations as a positive role model under the Education Act.

The member was reprimanded and his teaching certificate was suspended for three months.

The Committee noted the member had already completed over 125 hours of voluntary education on racism and diversity, satisfying the coursework condition of the penalty.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought disciplinary proceedings against a member for professional misconduct involving verbal, physical, and psychological abuse of students.

The member pleaded no contest to the allegations, which included yelling at students, comparing their work to humiliate them, and using unnecessary physical force by pulling a student by the wrist.

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 a course on classroom and anger management.

The member, a teacher, faced allegations of professional misconduct for establishing an inappropriate emotional relationship with a student and grooming her for a future personal relationship.

The member pleaded no contest to the allegations, admitting to verbal, psychological, and emotional abuse, as well as failing to maintain professional boundaries.

The Discipline Committee accepted the uncontested facts and found the member guilty of professional misconduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a reprimand and the immediate revocation of the member's teaching certificate.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a motion to strike the Member's application for reinstatement.

The Member's certificate was deemed revoked in December 2020 following a finding of professional misconduct involving sexual abuse of a student.

In June 2023, the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 was amended to require a five-year waiting period from the date of deemed revocation before an application for reinstatement could be made.

The Member argued that the amendment should not apply retroactively to his pending application.

The Discipline Committee held that the wording of the amended Act and its transitional provisions clearly indicated a legislative intent for the five-year waiting period to apply to certificates deemed revoked prior to the transition date.

The Committee found that the presumption against retroactivity was rebutted because the amendments were intended to protect the public.

The motion was granted, the application was struck, and the Member was prohibited from reapplying before December 8, 2025.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought disciplinary proceedings against a member for multiple incidents of professional misconduct during the 2017-2018 academic year.

The member failed to participate in a compulsory performance appraisal, frequently reported late or not at all for duties, failed to submit lesson plans, and assigned grades without adequate evaluation.

Additionally, the member verbally and psychologically abused a student by refusing to help her and yelling at her.

The Discipline Committee found the allegations proven on a balance of probabilities and concluded that the member was guilty of professional misconduct, including failing to maintain the standards of the profession, abusing a student, and engaging in disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional conduct.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a discipline proceeding against a member who took an extended leave of absence, claiming he was visiting his dying mother in Gabon and subsequently became too ill to return to Canada.

The College alleged that the member falsified medical records to receive sick leave benefits while actually participating in political activities and working for another organization in Gabon.

The Discipline Committee found that the member misrepresented his absences, falsified records, and received a salary from his Ontario employer while working abroad.

The Committee concluded that the member engaged in professional misconduct, including disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional conduct.