The appellant physician appealed a Discipline Committee decision finding he sexually abused a patient and engaged in professional misconduct towards three nurses, resulting in the revocation of his certificate of registration.
The appellant argued the Committee applied uneven scrutiny to the evidence and erred in imposing revocation.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the Committee's credibility assessments were fair, well-reasoned, and entitled to deference.
The Court also upheld the penalty of revocation, noting it was within the reasonable range for sexual misconduct, especially given the appellant's prior history of boundary violations and lack of rehabilitative potential.
