Glynnis Danielle MacDonald Hawe

The Member, a Registered Practical Nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for failing to administer medications to multiple patients at a long-term care facility and falsely documenting that the medications had been administered.

The Member also failed to perform a wound dressing change while documenting its completion.

The Member admitted to the allegations via an Agreed Statement of Facts.

The Discipline Committee found the Member committed professional misconduct and accepted a Joint Submission on Order, imposing a reprimand, a four-month suspension, and terms, conditions, and limitations on her certificate of registration, including employer notification and spot audits.

The plaintiff law firm brought a motion for an interlocutory injunction against a former associate and several staff members who abruptly left to start a competing firm, taking over 200 client files.

The court found the plaintiffs established a strong prima facie case for breach of fiduciary duty and good faith.

The court granted the injunction, ordering the defendants to pay the outstanding disbursements on the transferred files within five months and to hold a portion of the legal fees in trust upon settlement of the files to protect the plaintiffs' fee accounts.

The applicant sought judicial review of a decision by the Justices of the Peace Review Council dismissing his complaint against a justice of the peace who convicted him of a red-light camera offence.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding that the Council's investigation was procedurally fair and its decision reasonable.

The court noted that the applicant's complaints primarily concerned judicial decision-making, which falls outside the Council's jurisdiction, and that the transcript showed the justice of the peace treated the applicant fairly.

The appellants moved to expedite their appeal of a liability decision and to be relieved from filing a formal order, arguing that an early appeal could render a subsequent damages trial unnecessary.

The respondent opposed, contending that the appeal should not be scheduled until the damages trial was adjudicated, allowing for a single, comprehensive appeal.

The court dismissed the motion, emphasizing the principle of judicial economy and the ordinary practice of pursuing a single appeal encompassing both liability and damages.

The court found that fragmenting the appeal would likely delay the overall administration of justice and that any potential costs thrown away could be addressed in a costs award.

The moving party, the College of Nurses of Ontario, brought a motion to introduce further evidence on an appeal to address the appellant's allegation of a denial of procedural fairness.

The appellant brought a cross-motion to adduce responding evidence.

The single judge of the Divisional Court held that pursuant to s. 134(4)(b) of the Courts of Justice Act and Rule 61.16(2), a motion to admit further evidence on appeal must be made to the panel hearing the appeal.

Accordingly, the single judge lacked jurisdiction and adjourned the motion and cross-motion to be heard by the appeal panel.

The applicant dentist sought judicial review of a decision by the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board (HPARB), which affirmed a decision of the Inquiries, Complaints, and Reports Committee (ICRC) of the Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario.

The ICRC had ordered the applicant to complete a specified continuing education or remediation program (SCERP) and receive a caution regarding unnecessary dental restorations and providing inaccurate information during the investigation.

The applicant argued the ICRC made impermissible credibility findings and that the HPARB failed to provide meaningful analysis.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding that the ICRC's factual conclusions were reasonable, within its mandate, and supported by the documentary record, and that the HPARB's review was adequate and responsive.

The Member, a Registered Practical Nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for accessing a patient's electronic medical records on 10 separate occasions without consent or any clinical purpose.

The Member admitted to the allegations through an Agreed Statement of Facts.

The Discipline Committee found that the Member's actions constituted professional misconduct, specifically contravening the standards of practice and engaging in dishonourable and unprofessional conduct.

Accepting a Joint Submission on Order, the Committee ordered a reprimand, a two-month suspension of the Member's certificate of registration, and imposed terms, conditions, and limitations including meetings with a Regulatory Expert and employer notification.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought allegations of professional misconduct against a registered nurse for failing to maintain therapeutic boundaries and engaging in a romantic and sexual relationship with a vulnerable psychiatric patient.

The member admitted to the allegations, including emotional abuse and disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional conduct.

The Discipline Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, noting the member had already signed an undertaking to permanently resign and never practice nursing again.

The Member, a registered nurse, faced disciplinary proceedings for placing a colleague in a chokehold and for numerous medication administration and documentation errors.

The Member admitted to the allegations, which included failing to document medication wastage, administering narcotics without a witness signature, and failing to document patient assessments.

The Discipline Committee accepted an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission on Order, finding the Member committed professional misconduct.

The Member was reprimanded, suspended for four months, and subjected to terms, conditions, and limitations on her certificate of registration, including meetings with a regulatory expert and employer notification.

The Member, a Registered Practical Nurse, faced disciplinary proceedings for improperly restraining an elderly, visually impaired patient with dementia using a bedsheet, and failing to document or monitor the restraint.

The Member admitted to the allegations of professional misconduct, including failing to obtain consent, failing to consider alternatives, and engaging in disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional conduct.

The Discipline Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering an oral reprimand, a two-month suspension, and terms, conditions, and limitations on the Member's certificate of registration.

The Member, a registered nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for failing to participate in the College's Quality Assurance Program in 2015 and 2018, despite numerous attempts by the College to contact her.

The matter proceeded on an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission on Order.

The Discipline Committee found that the Member committed professional misconduct and engaged in unprofessional conduct.

The Committee accepted the joint submission on penalty, ordering an oral reprimand, a two-month suspension, and terms, conditions, and limitations on her certificate of registration, including meetings with a Regulatory Expert and mandatory participation in the next Quality Assurance program cycle.

The Member, a registered nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for failing to participate in and complete practice assessment requirements directed by the Quality Assurance Committee in 2013, 2014, and 2016.

The Member admitted to the allegations via an Agreed Statement of Facts.

The Discipline Committee found the Member committed professional misconduct and engaged in unprofessional conduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a reprimand, a two-month suspension (delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic), meetings with a regulatory expert, and mandatory participation in the next Quality Assurance program cycle.

The Member, a registered nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for failing to comply with a Resolution Agreement entered into with the College of Nurses of Ontario.

Despite numerous attempts by the College to contact the Member, she did not complete the required practice reflection and review of standards within the specified timeframe.

The Discipline Committee proceeded in the Member's absence and found her guilty of professional misconduct for failing to carry out an agreement and engaging in unprofessional conduct.

The Committee ordered a reprimand, a four-month suspension, and terms, conditions, and limitations on her certificate of registration.

The Member, a registered nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for failing to report multiple criminal charges and a finding of guilt for impaired driving to the College of Nurses of Ontario between 2014 and 2019.

The Member admitted to the allegations and agreed to a Statement of Facts.

The Discipline Committee found that the Member committed professional misconduct and engaged in dishonourable and unprofessional conduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a four-month suspension, an oral reprimand, and terms and conditions on the Member's certificate of registration.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought disciplinary proceedings against the Member for professional misconduct.

The Member had been criminally convicted of assaulting 11 patients, many of whom were minors, by conducting improper physical examinations.

He also breached a court recognizance and a written undertaking with the College by conducting an unsupervised physical examination of a 19-year-old male.

The Discipline Committee found the allegations proven, concluding the Member's conduct was disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional.

Given the severity of the misconduct, the Member's lack of participation, and his ungovernability, the Committee ordered an oral reprimand and the immediate revocation of his certificate of registration.

The Member, a Registered Practical Nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct including failing to attend scheduled patient visits, misappropriating funds by accepting pay for unattended visits, failing to document care, and driving with a suspended license.

The Member admitted to the allegations via an Agreed Statement of Facts.

The Discipline Committee found the Member committed professional misconduct and engaged in disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional conduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered an oral reprimand, a 12-month suspension, and terms, conditions, and limitations on the Member's certificate of registration.

The plaintiff, Ryan Dean, a self-represented litigant, sought $25 million in damages against numerous defendants, including the Immigration Consultants of Canada Regulatory Council (ICCRC) and several registered immigration consultants (Complainant Defendants), following his removal from the ICCRC board of directors.

The Complainant Defendants moved to strike Dean's claim for unlawful means conspiracy, arguing it disclosed no reasonable cause of action.

The court found that Dean failed to plead any unlawful conduct by the Complainant Defendants, as filing complaints with a regulator is a lawful act and not unlawful per se.

The claim also lacked essential elements of conspiracy, such as a clear agreement and purpose.

The court dismissed Dean's claim against the Complainant Defendants and denied leave to amend, as any new cause of action would be time-barred.

The Member, a registered nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for accessing the personal health information of multiple patients and her own records without authorization or clinical purpose over a five-year period.

She also engaged in a verbal confrontation with a colleague on hospital grounds.

The Member admitted to the allegations.

The Discipline Committee found her guilty of professional misconduct and accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, a three-month suspension, and terms and conditions including meetings with a regulatory expert and employer notification.

In a professional discipline hearing, the member admitted allegations involving sexual impropriety with a patient who was also an employee, and longstanding sexual harassment and degrading conduct toward staff in a dental practice.

The panel found professional misconduct proven on the member’s admissions and the agreed statement of facts.

Applying the public-interest standard governing joint submissions on sanction, the panel accepted a joint submission for reprimand, immediate revocation of the certificate of registration, and $10,000 in costs.

The panel held that revocation was necessary for public protection, denunciation, deterrence, and maintenance of public confidence in the profession.

The appellants sought review of a chambers order dismissing their request to file a 60-page factum in an appeal.

The Court of Appeal upheld the chambers judge's decision, finding no error in requiring compliance with the Rules of Civil Procedure, which limit factums to 30 pages except in exceptional circumstances.

The court found no exceptional circumstances present and determined the appellants could adequately address the relevant issues within the 30-page limit, noting their statement of facts was not sufficiently concise.