Dr. Thomas

At a case conference, the court addressed ongoing procedural delays and tactical gamesmanship between the parties.

The defendants sought to bring a contempt motion for the plaintiffs' failure to comply with an order to answer undertakings, while the plaintiffs sought a cross-motion for security for costs.

Relying on the culture shift mandated by Hryniak and the powers under Rule 50.13, the court declined to schedule formal motions and instead made summary orders directing the plaintiffs to comply with the prior order, produce physical flooring samples in Toronto for inspection, and file corrected pleadings.

The appellant dentist appealed a decision of the Discipline Committee finding him guilty of professional misconduct regarding his treatment of temporomandibular joint disorders.

He argued that a committee member's prior involvement with a Quality Assurance Committee created a reasonable apprehension of bias, and that the committee erred in refusing to qualify his proposed expert witness.

The Divisional Court dismissed the bias claim but found the committee erred in refusing to qualify the expert witness.

The findings of misconduct that depended on expert testimony were quashed, and the penalty and costs were set aside and remitted to a newly constituted panel.