Jane Alexandra Langford

The defendant physicians brought a motion for summary judgment arguing that a medical negligence claim arising from treatment that preceded a patient’s death from necrotizing fasciitis was statute-barred under the one‑year limitation period in s. 89 of the Regulated Health Professions Act.

The estate argued that the limitation period did not begin to run until a medical expert later reviewed the records and identified specific errors in treatment.

The court held that discoverability required knowledge of material facts establishing potential negligence, which in complex medical cases may require expert interpretation of medical records.

Because the plaintiff only obtained those material facts after receiving an expert analysis of the records, the action was commenced within the applicable limitation period.

The motion for summary judgment was dismissed.

The respondents brought a motion to transfer the hearing of an application regarding a road access dispute from Toronto to Parry Sound.

The applicants, who reside in British Columbia, commenced the application in Toronto.

The court considered the factors under Rule 13.1.02(2)(b) of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

While the events occurred in Parry Sound and the subject property is located there, the court found that transferring the matter would not be desirable in the interests of justice, primarily because an expeditious hearing date had already been set in Toronto and it was unclear if a timely hearing could be accommodated in Parry Sound.

The motion was dismissed.

The applicant, a Convention refugee from Iran, applied to the Ontario College of Teachers for a Certificate of Qualification.

The College refused to evaluate his application because he could not provide original transcripts sent directly from the issuing institutions in Iran, a requirement he could not meet due to his refugee status and fear of endangering his family.

The Tribunal found that the College's strict adherence to this requirement, without accommodating the applicant's circumstances, constituted discrimination on the basis of place of origin.

The Tribunal awarded $10,000 for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect, but denied the claim for lost wages because the applicant did not meet other mandatory certification requirements, such as holding a post-secondary degree and proving language proficiency.

The Discipline Committee of the Ontario College of Teachers held a penalty hearing after finding the member guilty of professional misconduct for making derogatory comments to students about his former wife's weight.

The College sought an oral reprimand, a language sensitivity course, and unnamed publication.

The member sought no penalty or unrecorded counselling.

The Committee ordered the member to complete a pre-approved language sensitivity course before accepting employment requiring a teaching certificate.

The Committee also ordered that the finding and order be published in the College's official publication without the member's name, and that the finding not be recorded on the Register due to the minor and historical nature of the misconduct.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought numerous allegations of professional misconduct against a high school teacher, alleging he made denigrating, sexual, and racist comments to students, staff, and parents.

After a lengthy hearing spanning three years, the Discipline Committee dismissed the vast majority of the 61 alleged incidents, finding the evidence insufficient or the conduct not rising to the level of professional misconduct.

However, the Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct for making derogatory comments in class about his ex-wife's weight, which it deemed unprofessional.

The Court of Appeal issued an endorsement regarding costs following an appeal concerning the allocation of defence costs between an insurer and an insured.

The respondent, the insured university, was awarded costs on a partial indemnity basis fixed at $25,000, inclusive of disbursements and GST.

The appellant insurer appealed a trial judge's decision allocating 95% of the respondent insured's defence costs to the insurer.

The underlying action involved multiple claims, including wrongful dismissal and malicious prosecution, but only the malicious prosecution claim was covered by the policy.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the allocation of defence costs for mixed claims is a matter of contractual interpretation, not fairness or equity.

Because the policy contained an unqualified obligation to pay for the defence of covered claims, the insurer was required to pay all reasonable costs associated with defending the malicious prosecution claim, even if those costs also assisted in defending uncovered claims.

Following a successful appeal that allowed the plaintiff's claim to proceed to trial, the parties agreed on costs of $44,000 but disputed the timing of payment.

The plaintiff, an impecunious litigant represented on a pro bono basis, sought costs payable forthwith.

The defendant argued costs should be in the cause or paid into court as security.

The Court of Appeal ordered the costs to be paid forthwith, noting that the appeal costs were stand-alone and that ordering costs payable forthwith assists impecunious litigants and encourages lawyers to accept pro bono retainers.

The appellant was wrongfully charged with second-degree murder based on an autopsy performed by the respondent pathologist.

After the charges were withdrawn, the appellant sued the respondent for negligent investigation and misfeasance in public office.

The respondent successfully moved at the Divisional Court to strike the claims based on absolute witness immunity.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that the claims related to the respondent's role as a public official investigating a suspicious death under the Coroners Act, not merely his testimony.

The Court found that the scope of witness immunity in this context is unsettled law and must be determined at trial on a full factual record.

The Member, a Superintendent of Educational Services, pleaded guilty to professional misconduct for failing to adequately supervise and engaging in conduct unbecoming a member.

During the administration of the Ontario Secondary School Literacy Test (OSSLT), the Member was present at a meeting where teachers advised scribes not to seal completed test booklets, contrary to EQAO protocols.

The Member remained silent, which constituted tacit agreement and a failure to discharge his supervisory responsibilities.

The Discipline Committee accepted the joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, a one-month suspension of his certificate, and publication of the decision.

The member, a teacher, faced allegations of professional misconduct for inappropriately touching female elementary students on multiple occasions between 1969 and 2001.

The member pleaded no contest to the allegations and resigned his teaching certificate, stating his intention never to teach in Ontario again.

The Discipline Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, finding the member guilty of professional misconduct and ordering a reprimand and publication of the decision with the member's name.

The plaintiff was charged with the second-degree murder of her daughter based on an autopsy report by the defendant forensic pathologist, which concluded the cause of death was multiple stab wounds.

After a second autopsy revealed the wounds were likely caused by dog bites, the charges were withdrawn.

The plaintiff sued the pathologist for negligence, bad faith, and misfeasance in public office.

The pathologist appealed a motion judge's refusal to strike the claim.

The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, holding that the witness immunity rule applied to the pathologist's autopsy report and testimony at the preliminary inquiry, rendering him immune from civil suit.

At a discipline hearing, the Ontario College of Teachers sought leave to withdraw the allegations set out in the Notice of Hearing against the member, as the College was unable to call any evidence in support of the allegations.

The member consented to the withdrawal.

The Discipline Panel granted the application and ordered the Notice of Hearing withdrawn.

The member, a high school English teacher, engaged in inappropriate conversations and contacts with female students, including seeking them out at work, providing unsolicited gifts, and inviting them on out-of-school trips.

When an investigation was launched, he contacted students despite being warned not to.

The member pled no contest to professional misconduct.

The Discipline Committee accepted a joint submission, finding the member guilty of professional misconduct and accepting his voluntary resignation of his teaching certificate, with an undertaking not to seek reinstatement for two years.

The member, a secondary school teacher, pleaded no contest to allegations of professional misconduct arising from voluntary question-and-answer sessions on sexual matters with student team members in hotel rooms during athletic road trips.

The Discipline Committee accepted the agreed statement of facts and joint submission on penalty, finding the member guilty of professional misconduct.

The member was ordered to be reprimanded and conditions were imposed on his certificate of qualification, including the completion of a course on appropriate teacher-student boundaries.

The Ontario College of Teachers sought leave to withdraw the allegations set out in the Notice of Hearing against the Member due to insufficient evidence.

The Member consented to the withdrawal.

The Discipline Committee granted the application and ordered the Notice of Hearing withdrawn.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought discipline proceedings against a member for professional misconduct and incompetence related to the sexual abuse of multiple students.

The member had previously pleaded guilty to criminal charges of sexual assault.

Before the Discipline Committee, the member admitted to the facts, pleaded guilty to several allegations, and pleaded no contest to others.

The Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering the immediate revocation of the member's teaching certificate and the publication of his name in the College's official publication.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought disciplinary proceedings against a member for professional misconduct related to his employment as a probationary Grade 8 French teacher.

The member experienced severe difficulties with classroom management, failed to provide adequate lesson plans, and verbally abused students.

Despite extensive support and resources provided by the school administration, the member's performance remained unsatisfactory, leading to his resignation.

The member pled guilty to professional misconduct.

The Discipline Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a six-month suspension of the member's certificate, postponed for one year on the condition that he complete coursework in classroom management and lesson planning, and provide satisfactory performance appraisals.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought discipline proceedings against a member for professional misconduct and incompetence.

The member, who did not attend the hearing, had a history of using inappropriate physical force against students and had accumulated multiple criminal convictions, including assault, dangerous driving, uttering death threats, and failing to comply with court orders.

An expert in threat assessment testified that the member fit the typology of a simple obsessional stalker and posed a high risk for potential violence.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct and incompetence, and ordered the immediate revocation of his teaching certificate.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought discipline proceedings against a teacher for professional misconduct and incompetence.

The member was alleged to have failed to maintain professional standards, verbally abused students, and demonstrated a lack of classroom management skills and punctuality across multiple school assignments.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct and incompetence, noting her failure to teach the curriculum, improper student evaluations, verbal abuse of students, and frequent unauthorized absences.

The Committee ordered the immediate revocation of the member's certificate of qualification and registration.