Jordan Alexander Stone

The Retirement Homes Regulatory Authority (RHRA) brought an application seeking an order for the respondents to cease illegally operating a retirement home and to wind up their business.

The core issue was whether the respondents' facility met the definition of a retirement home under the Retirement Homes Act, specifically concerning the "administration of a drug or other substance." The court found that the respondents did administer drugs based on the ordinary meaning of the term, their own definition, and a purposive interpretation of the Act, which aims to protect vulnerable individuals.

The court also found other care services were provided.

Given the respondents' history of non-compliance and deliberate attempts to avoid regulation, the court granted the RHRA's request to shut down the premises, ordering it to be vacated within six months, and awarded costs to the applicant.

The appellant teacher appealed a decision of the Discipline Committee of the Ontario College of Teachers dismissing his application for reinstatement and revoking his teaching certificate.

The appellant's certificate was automatically revoked following 2020 amendments to the Ontario College of Teachers Act due to a 2009 finding of professional misconduct involving sexual abuse of a student.

The appellant argued the panel erred by giving retrospective effect to the amendments and imposing a more severe penalty than his original two-year suspension.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the presumption against retrospectivity was rebutted by the express language of the amended legislation, which clearly intended for the revocation provision to apply retrospectively.

The Member, a transportation technology teacher, pleaded no contest to allegations of professional misconduct.

During the 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 academic years, he failed to adequately teach his classes, relying almost exclusively on video lessons and failing to answer student questions.

He also used the school's auto body shop and equipment to perform work for an external business, receiving financial benefits in return, and failed to report this conflict of interest.

The Discipline Committee found him guilty of professional misconduct and accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, a two-month suspension, and the completion of coursework on curriculum, lesson planning, instructional strategies, and conflict of interest.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a discipline proceeding against a member for professional misconduct.

The member pleaded no contest to allegations of verbal, physical, and psychological abuse of students, as well as failing to adequately supervise a student and violating health and safety requirements.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a reprimand, a five-month suspension of the member's certificate of qualification and registration, and the completion of coursework on maintaining appropriate boundaries with students.

The Member applied for reinstatement of his teaching certificate, which had been deemed revoked under section 30.3 of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 following a 2009 finding of professional misconduct involving the sexual abuse of a student.

The Member was permitted to apply for reinstatement because he had received a criminal pardon for his related conviction.

Applying the Lamarche factors, the Discipline Committee denied the application, finding that the Member lacked sufficient insight into his misconduct, had not undertaken adequate psychological counselling, and continued to view his relationship with the student as having developed naturally.

The Committee concluded that reinstatement would pose an unacceptable risk to students and negatively affect public trust in the profession.

The Registrar was directed to immediately revoke the Member's certificate.

In a professional discipline hearing subject to a publication ban, the member admitted boundary violations and sexual conduct with a vulnerable client following the provision of counselling-related social work services.

The Panel found professional misconduct under the governing statute and regulation, including sexual misconduct, failure to maintain proper boundaries, failure to prioritize the client's interests, and recordkeeping failures.

The Panel accepted a joint submission on penalty, holding that departure was unwarranted absent a risk to public confidence in the discipline process.

The member was reprimanded, her certificate of registration was revoked, reinstatement was barred for five years, publication was ordered, and costs of $3,000.00 were imposed.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a discipline proceeding against the Member for professional misconduct.

The Member was alleged to have verbally abused students by using profanity and making culturally insensitive comments, and to have failed to keep accurate records of student marks, which adversely affected at least one student's post-secondary applications.

The Member did not attend the hearing.

The Discipline Committee found the Member engaged in professional misconduct.

The Committee ordered a reprimand, a three-month suspension of the Member's certificate, and the completion of coursework.

The Member was also ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the College.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a discipline proceeding against the member for professional misconduct.

The member did not attend the hearing.

The Discipline Committee found that the member engaged in professional misconduct contrary to several subsections of Ontario Regulation 437/97.

The Committee ordered a reprimand, a three-month suspension of the member's Certificate of Qualification and Registration, and imposed terms requiring the successful completion of coursework regarding student evaluation and applying ethical standards in a diverse classroom.

The member was also ordered to pay $10,000 in costs to the College.

Written reasons were to follow.

The Member, a Vice-Principal, pleaded no contest to allegations of professional misconduct after allowing a student to host a party at his residence where underage drinking and marijuana use occurred.

The Discipline Committee found the Member guilty of unprofessional conduct and conduct unbecoming a member.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a reprimand and required the Member to complete coursework on professional ethics and boundaries.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a discipline proceeding against the Member for professional misconduct.

The Member pleaded no contest to allegations of verbal and psychological abuse of a student, as well as disgraceful, dishonourable, unprofessional, and unbecoming conduct.

The Member engaged in inappropriate and unwelcome conduct with a student, including asking for her personal phone number, inviting her to the movies, and showing her images of sex dolls on his phone.

He also engaged in inappropriate conduct with a colleague.

The Discipline Committee found the Member guilty of professional misconduct and accepted a joint submission on penalty.

The Member was ordered to receive a reprimand, serve a five-month suspension, and complete coursework on professional boundaries.

The Member, a teacher, engaged in an inappropriate personal relationship and boundary violations with a vulnerable student.

The Member exchanged numerous personal text messages with the student, invited her to his home, allowed her to sleep over, and gave her a massage.

The Member continued this contact even after being directed by the school board to cease communication.

The Member pleaded no contest to allegations of professional misconduct.

The Discipline Committee found the Member guilty of professional misconduct, including psychological or emotional abuse of a student.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a reprimand, a 10-month suspension of the Member's certificate, and the completion of coursework on professional boundaries.

The applicant, an immigration consultant, sought judicial review of a Discipline Committee decision revoking her license for professional misconduct.

During the Syrian refugee crisis, the applicant required clients to pay their own settlement funds and prohibited fees, misrepresented sponsorship rules, and withheld refunds to extract liability waivers.

The Federal Court found the Committee's decision to revoke the applicant's membership was reasonable, internally coherent, and justified in relation to the relevant facts and law, noting she knowingly contravened industry standards and her duties of honesty and good faith.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a motion seeking leave to withdraw the allegations of professional misconduct against the member, citing insufficient evidence and no reasonable prospect of a finding.

The member consented to the motion.

The Discipline Committee granted the motion, finding that it was not in the public interest to proceed with a matter where there was no reasonable prospect of obtaining a finding of professional misconduct.

The Member, a school principal, pleaded no contest to allegations of professional misconduct involving the harassment of two female teachers.

The Discipline Committee accepted the uncontested facts, finding that the Member made inappropriate comments, engaged in unwelcome physical contact, and failed to maintain professional boundaries.

The Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, a four-month suspension of the Member's certificate, and the completion of coursework on professional boundaries.

The appellant architect appealed a finding of professional misconduct by the OAA Discipline Committee.

The Committee found the architect in a conflict of interest under s. 43(1)(f) of the Regulation because he provided millwork drawings for a renovation project while also owning a company that submitted a quote for the work.

The appellant argued the provision only applied to formal tendering processes creating a Contract A/Contract B scenario.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the Committee correctly interpreted 'tenders or bids' to include informal competitive bidding processes, consistent with the plain meaning of the words and the public interest purpose of the legislation.

The Member, a teacher, faced allegations of professional misconduct for making inappropriate comments to female students, failing to respect their personal space, and exposing students to remarks of a sexual nature.

The Member pleaded no contest to the allegations.

The Discipline Committee found the Member guilty of professional misconduct, including verbal and psychological abuse, and sexual misconduct.

The Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, and noted that the Member had resigned and signed an undertaking never to teach again in Ontario.

The member, a teacher, pleaded guilty to professional misconduct for falsifying medical reports from physicians to obtain extended medical leaves from her employer over a period of several years.

The Discipline Committee accepted the agreed statement of facts and found the member's actions to be disgraceful, dishonourable, unprofessional, and unbecoming a member.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a reprimand, a three-month suspension of the member's certificate of qualification, and the successful completion of a professional ethics course.

The member, a teacher, pleaded no contest to allegations of professional misconduct arising from her participation in a false invoicing scheme to defraud her husband's employer of over $864,000 USD.

The member and her husband were previously found liable for civil fraud.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct, characterizing her actions as disgraceful, dishonourable, unprofessional, and unbecoming a member.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered that the member be reprimanded and her Certificate of Qualification and Registration be suspended for eight months.

The Retirement Homes Regulatory Authority (RHRA) brought an urgent application seeking an order for In Touch Retirement Living for Vegetarians/Vegans Inc. and Elaine Lindo (the Respondents) to cease operating as an unlicensed retirement home.

The Respondents filed a cross-application challenging the enforcement of the Retirement Homes Act, 2010 on Charter grounds and requesting consideration for a licence.

The court granted the RHRA's application, finding a continuous breach of the Act and dismissing the cross-application due to procedural deficiencies and lack of legal merit for the Charter claims.

Ancillary relief was also granted to ensure the safe transfer of residents.

In a professional discipline motion, the member sought to quash a notice of hearing on the basis that the alleged misconduct occurred before registration.

The Panel held that the Discipline Committee has jurisdiction over pre-membership conduct where a broad and purposive reading of the governing statute, informed by the College's public protection mandate, supports that result.

The Panel rejected the submission that the registration regime exhaustively addresses pre-registration misconduct and held that the presumption against retrospectivity does not bar jurisdiction in this public protection context.

It adopted a suitability-based threshold, holding that jurisdiction extends to pre-membership conduct that calls into question the member's current suitability to practise.