Administrative Law - CPAO

The Professional Conduct Committee alleged that the Member committed professional misconduct by failing to meet continuing professional development requirements, submitting a false declaration, and failing to comply with professional standards in four compilation engagements.

The Member did not attend the hearing.

The Discipline Committee proceeded in his absence, qualified the investigator as an expert witness, and found all allegations proven.

The Committee revoked the Member's membership, imposed a $15,000 fine, and ordered $16,500 in costs, citing his prior disciplinary history and the seriousness of making false statements to the regulator.

The Appellant, a revoked member of CPA Ontario, brought a motion to introduce fresh evidence at his upcoming appeal hearing.

The proposed evidence included a handwriting expert report, medical records, a hearing transcript, and financial statements.

The Appeal Committee applied the test for fresh evidence and dismissed the motion for the majority of the documents, finding they were either available at the time of the reconsideration hearing or would not have affected the outcome.

However, the Committee allowed the admission of the Appellant's CRA documents for 2022 and 2023, as they may be relevant to the determination of costs.

The Professional Conduct Committee alleged that the member failed to perform his professional services in accordance with generally accepted standards of practice of the profession, contrary to Rule 206.1 of the CPA Ontario Code of Professional Conduct.

The allegations related to multiple audit, review, and compilation engagements, including audits of reporting issuers, where significant deficiencies were identified.

The member admitted the allegations.

The Discipline Committee found that the allegations were established and constituted professional misconduct.

The Committee ordered that the member's assurance practice be restricted to permanently prohibit him from performing audits of reporting issuers, that he enter into an 18-month supervision agreement for all other assurance engagements, and that he pay a $25,000 fine and $42,000 in costs.

The Professional Conduct Committee alleged that the Member committed professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with two investigations into complaints from former clients.

The Member did not attend the hearing.

The Discipline Committee found that the Member breached Rule 104.2 of the CPA Ontario Code of Professional Conduct by failing to respond to repeated communications from Standards Enforcement staff over several months.

The Committee ordered the Member to cooperate, pay a fine of $7,500, and pay costs of $2,800, failing which her membership would be suspended and ultimately revoked.

The applicant applied to be registered as a student with CPA Ontario and disclosed a prior criminal conviction for assault causing bodily harm and a prior bankruptcy.

The Registrar referred the application to the Admission and Registration Committee for a good character hearing.

The Committee applied the Armstrong factors and found that the applicant had demonstrated good character on a balance of probabilities.

The Committee noted the applicant's genuine remorse, extensive rehabilitative efforts, successful completion of post-secondary education, and the granting of a record suspension.

The Registrar was directed to register the applicant as a student.

The Member faced an allegation of professional misconduct for failing to cooperate with a CPA Ontario investigation into a complaint by her former employer.

The Member admitted the facts but argued she could not substantively respond to the investigation because doing so might prejudice her defence in ongoing civil litigation with the complainant.

The Discipline Committee found that the duty to cooperate is a substantive obligation that cannot be deferred pending civil litigation.

The Committee found the Member committed professional misconduct and ordered a $5,000 fine, $3,400 in costs, and required her to provide a substantive response within 30 days, failing which her membership would be suspended and ultimately revoked.

The Member was convicted of two counts of assault against a former mentee and direct report, arising from non-consensual touching at a fundraising event.

The Professional Conduct Committee alleged this conduct breached Rule 201.1 of the CPA Ontario Code of Professional Conduct.

The Discipline Committee found the allegations established and that the conduct constituted professional misconduct.

The Member was suspended for 9 months, permanently restricted from acting as a formal CPA Ontario mentor, fined $10,000, and ordered to pay costs of $5,700.

The Registrar applied for a determination of whether the Member was incapacitated under section 43 of the Chartered Professional Accountants of Ontario Act, 2017.

The Member had failed to respond to an investigation into a complaint, citing mental health challenges, and his treating psychiatrist opined he was unable to fulfill his obligations under the Act.

The Capacity Committee found the Member incapacitated and ordered his membership suspended indefinitely until he can demonstrate to the Registrar's satisfaction that he is capable of meeting his obligations.

In a professional discipline proceeding arising from four annual audits of a large construction group, the Panel found extensive failures to comply with auditing standards in client acceptance, audit planning, fraud risk assessment, professional skepticism, materiality, related-party procedures, internal controls, contract testing, marketable securities testing, covenant analysis, and reporting.

One respondent was also found to have failed to exercise due care when accepting the engagement despite serious warnings from the predecessor auditor concerning suspected fraud and scope limitations.

Applying the balance of probabilities standard, the Panel held that the evidence of the applicant’s expert established professional misconduct under Rules 202.1 and 206.1, except for one narrowly worded allegation concerning signatures on a management representation letter.

The Panel then applied the Anthony-Cook public interest test and, although expressing significant reservations, accepted joint submissions imposing fines, publication, compliance consequences, and substantial costs.

The applicant applied for admission to membership with the Chartered Professional Accountants of Ontario (CPA Ontario).

This was his second good character hearing, having been denied membership in 2021 due to a prior criminal finding of guilt for assault causing bodily harm and academic dishonesty.

In his 2023 application, the applicant failed to disclose his criminal record and academic misconduct.

Furthermore, an investigation revealed he was listed as a CPA on a company website and was acting as a director for an unregistered accounting firm operated by his uncle, a convicted fraudster.

The Admission and Registration Committee found that the applicant repeatedly concealed information and exercised poor professional judgment.

The Committee concluded the applicant failed to establish he was of good character on a balance of probabilities and denied his application, but permitted him to re-apply in two years.

The applicant applied for admission to membership with the Chartered Professional Accountants of Ontario.

The Registrar referred the application to the Admission and Registration Committee after discovering the applicant had a criminal conviction for failing to provide a breath sample, which he had not disclosed on his application.

The panel considered the applicant's rehabilitative efforts, including ethics courses and counselling, and his genuine remorse.

The panel found that the applicant established on a balance of probabilities that he was of good character at the time of the hearing and ordered his admission to membership.