The appellant optometrist appealed a decision of the College's discipline committee finding him guilty of professional misconduct for the sexual abuse of a patient.
The Divisional Court allowed the appeal and remitted the matter for a new hearing, finding that the discipline committee made palpable and overriding errors in its credibility assessments.
Specifically, the committee subjected the appellant's evidence to a higher standard of scrutiny than the complainant's evidence, resulting in an unfair proceeding.
