Emily Lawrence

The Member, a registered nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for failing to participate in the College's Quality Assurance program after being randomly selected.

The Member admitted to the allegations, explaining he did not complete the assessment due to a lack of computer proficiency.

The Discipline Committee found the Member committed professional misconduct.

Given that the Member had retired and signed an undertaking to permanently resign and never reapply for registration, the Committee accepted a joint submission ordering a reprimand.

The Member, a registered nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for harassing three co-workers, including inappropriate comments and physical touching without consent.

Following an agreed statement of facts, the Discipline Committee found the Member committed professional misconduct by engaging in conduct that was disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional.

The Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, a four-month suspension, and terms including meetings with a nursing expert and employer notification.

The applicant sought leave to appeal an arbitral award finding it breached contractual and fiduciary duties by failing to redeem the respondent's hedge fund investment.

The arbitrator awarded $1.3 million in damages, rejecting the applicant's argument that damages should be assessed based on an alternative, less onerous method of performance.

The Superior Court denied leave to appeal, finding that the arbitrator correctly interpreted the contract as mandating only one method of performance and that the applicant's challenges raised issues of mixed fact and law, not extricable questions of law.

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

The misconduct included criminal convictions for possession of stolen license plates, breaking and entering, and using a stolen credit card, as well as professional transgressions such as failing to attend client appointments, misappropriating a narcotic, attempting to steal from a client's family member, and billing for unmade visits.

The member did not attend the hearing.

The Committee accepted the College's submission, ordering an oral reprimand and the immediate revocation of the member's certificate of registration, emphasizing specific and general deterrence and the member's ungovernability.

The Member, a registered practical nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct including verbal, physical, and sexual abuse of clients, as well as falsifying records.

The Member admitted to the allegations and an Agreed Statement of Facts was presented.

The Discipline Committee found that the Member committed the acts of professional misconduct, which were deemed disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional.

The Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, noting that the Member had permanently resigned and signed an undertaking never to practice nursing again.

The Member brought a pre-hearing motion seeking to stay professional misconduct proceedings due to unreasonable delay and abuse of process by the College of Nurses of Ontario.

The College had investigated allegations of sexual abuse but allowed the Member to continue practicing for nearly two years before imposing an interim suspension.

The Discipline Committee found that the College's unexplained investigative delays, combined with the imposition of an interim suspension without a timely hearing, constituted an abuse of process that prejudiced the administration of justice.

The motion was granted and the proceedings were stayed.

The member, a registered practical nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for breaching a Fitness to Practise Order.

The member admitted to failing to notify the College of her employment, failing to inform her employer of the conditions on her certificate, failing to file required confirmation letters, and practising without a monitor.

The Discipline Committee found the member committed professional misconduct and accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, a three-month suspension, and terms, conditions, and limitations on her certificate of registration.

The College of Nurses of Ontario appealed a discipline panel's decision regarding a nurse who was found guilty of professional misconduct following criminal convictions for child pornography offences.

The nurse had resigned prior to the hearing, and the panel concluded it lacked jurisdiction to revoke his certificate of registration because it was 'non-existent'.

The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, finding the panel's interpretation unreasonable and contrary to the broad, purposive intent of the Regulated Health Professions Act.

The Court held that the College retains continuing jurisdiction to impose sanctions, including revocation, on former members to protect the public.

The Court set aside the panel's penalty and ordered the revocation of the respondent's certificate.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought discipline proceedings against a Registered Practical Nurse for professional misconduct.

The allegations included criminal convictions for possession of stolen property, break and enter, and using a stolen credit card, as well as workplace misconduct including failing to attend scheduled home care appointments, billing for unmade visits, and misappropriating narcotics from a client.

The Discipline Committee found the allegations proven on a balance of probabilities, relying on documentary evidence, witness testimony, and expert opinion.

The Committee concluded the nurse's actions demonstrated deliberate deceit and moral failing, constituting disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional conduct.

The member, a registered practical nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for failing to maintain therapeutic boundaries and accepting over $55,000 from the spouse of a client.

The member admitted to the allegations and entered an agreed statement of facts.

The Discipline Committee found the member committed professional misconduct.

As the member had already permanently resigned her certificate of registration and signed an undertaking never to reapply, the Committee accepted a joint submission ordering an oral reprimand.

The appellant, a real estate broker, appealed a decision of the Licence Appeal Tribunal directing the Registrar to revoke his registration.

The revocation was based on the appellant's criminal conviction for sexual assault against an employee and his failure to disclose his interest in a property management business on his renewal applications for over a decade.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the Tribunal's conclusions regarding the appellant's character and the necessity of revocation to protect the public were reasonable.

The Ontario Energy Board appealed a decision that had required it to apply a mandatory prudence framework when assessing Ontario Power Generation compensation costs in rate-setting.

The majority held tribunal participation in defending its own decision was proper in this regulatory context and found no impermissible bootstrapping on appeal.

The Court held the governing statute did not require a single prudence methodology and permitted the Board to use a mixed approach for costs that were partly committed and partly subject to managerial discretion.

The Board’s disallowance of $145 million in compensation costs was found reasonable, and its original decision was reinstated.

The appellant nurse appealed a penalty order from the Discipline Committee of the College of Nurses of Ontario.

She argued the Panel was functus officio when it issued its reasons after the order, that it lacked jurisdiction to order her participation in a quality assurance program, and that the penalty was disproportionately harsh.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the Panel had a statutory duty to issue written reasons, possessed broad remedial discretion under the Health Professions Procedural Code, and imposed a reasonable penalty aimed at protecting the public interest.

The Appellant brought a motion to stay the Tribunal's order revoking his registration as a real estate broker pending his appeal to the Divisional Court.

The Tribunal applied the three-part RJR MacDonald test.

While the Appellant established a serious issue to be tried and the balance of convenience favoured him, he failed to establish irreparable harm.

However, weighing the elements holistically, the Tribunal concluded the overall justice of the matter favoured granting the stay.

The stay was granted for nine months, with the Appellant's registration reinstated subject to strict conditions, including close supervision.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought disciplinary proceedings against a registered nurse who had been found guilty of two separate criminal assaults and failed to report the second finding of guilt to the College.

The member admitted to the allegations and agreed to a statement of facts.

The Discipline Committee found that the member committed professional misconduct, including engaging in disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional conduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a reprimand, a three-month suspension of the member's certificate of registration, and terms and conditions including meetings with a nursing expert and employer notification.

The appellant entered into a contract with the respondent for the storage of vaccines in a temperature-controlled warehouse.

The contract required the appellant to maintain all-risk property insurance.

After the cooling system malfunctioned and destroyed the vaccines, the appellant's insurer brought a subrogated action against the respondent and other contractors involved in the warehouse's operations.

The Court of Appeal upheld the summary judgment dismissing the action, finding that the insurance covenant barred the claim against the respondent (except for a $100,000 negligence carve-out) and that the other contractors were third-party beneficiaries of this protection.

The applicant, a registered nurse, was found unconscious at work after using narcotics misappropriated from the hospital.

He admitted to a drug addiction.

The College of Nurses of Ontario's Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee (ICRC) ordered him to undergo an independent medical examination.

The applicant sought judicial review, arguing that a report from his treating addiction specialist was sufficient and that the order violated his Charter rights.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, holding that the ICRC's statutory requirement to find 'reasonable and probable grounds' before ordering an examination adequately balances Charter values, and that a treating physician's report does not substitute for an independent medical examination.

The Member, a registered practical nurse, faced disciplinary proceedings for failing to provide appropriate care to a psychiatric client who suffered an anxiety attack and was later found vital signs absent.

The Member failed to follow a physician's order for constant observation, failed to document his checks, and delayed initiating a Code Blue and CPR when the client was found unresponsive.

The client subsequently died.

The Member admitted to the allegations of professional misconduct.

The Discipline Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, a two-month suspension, and remedial terms including meetings with a nursing expert and employer notification.

The Member, a registered practical nurse, was randomly selected to participate in a practice assessment as part of the College's Quality Assurance program.

Despite multiple notifications and opportunities, the Member failed to participate or complete any portion of the process.

The Discipline Committee found the Member committed professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with the Quality Assurance Committee.

The panel ordered a reprimand, a three-month suspension, and terms, conditions, and limitations on her certificate of registration, but declined to order costs.

The appellant appealed a decision of the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board affirming the denial of her registration as a Registered Practical Nurse.

The appellant had failed the non-exemptible licensing examination three times, despite receiving accommodations for reading difficulties on her second and third attempts.

The Divisional Court applied a reasonableness standard of review and found no evidence of testing improprieties or extraordinary circumstances to justify annulling the examinations.

The appeal was dismissed.