Hakim Kassam

The member brought a motion to adjourn the continuation of his discipline hearing due to medical issues.

The College consented to the adjournment on the condition that the member sign an Undertaking and Acknowledgement agreeing not to teach until the matter is adjudicated.

The Discipline Committee granted the adjournment, finding that the medical issues were an appropriate reason and the public interest was protected by the undertaking.

This is an appeal from a decision of the Consent and Capacity Board (CCB) which found the appellant incapable of consenting to treatment with antipsychotic medications under the Health Care Consent Act.

The appellant, who did not appear for the virtual hearing, argued that the CCB failed to consider whether he could recognize the possibility of being affected by a mental condition and erred in its corroboration finding.

Applying the palpable and overriding error standard of review, the court found that the CCB had sufficient evidence to support its conclusion that the appellant could not appreciate the reasonably foreseeable consequences of refusing treatment due to his illness, and that the corroborative evidence from his family was sufficient.

The appeal was dismissed.

The plaintiff sought leave under s. 138.8 of the Ontario Securities Act to commence an action for secondary market misrepresentation against Pretium Resources Inc. and Robert A. Quartermain.

The plaintiff alleged that the defendants failed to disclose material facts regarding conflicting expert opinions on the validity of a mineral resource estimate for the Brucejack Project, leading to a significant drop in share price.

The court granted leave, finding that the plaintiff established a reasonable possibility of success at trial.

The court determined that the concerns raised by Strathcona Mineral Services, a respected mining consultant, were material facts that a reasonable investor would consider important, despite Pretium's belief that the data was unreliable.

Furthermore, the court found a reasonable possibility that the defendants would not be able to establish the "no reasonable grounds to believe" branch of their reasonable investigation defense under s. 138.4(6) of the OSA.