Robert K. Stephenson

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought disciplinary proceedings against the Member for alleged sexual abuse of a patient.

The Member brought a preliminary motion for third-party production of the Complainant's mental health and counselling records, arguing they were relevant to the Complainant's reliability and memory due to his history of bipolar schizoaffective disorder.

Applying the O'Connor test, the Discipline Committee ordered the production of records from one treating psychiatrist for a limited timeframe overlapping with the alleged incident and the Complainant's decision to report it.

The requests for all other counselling and historical mental health records were denied for failing to meet the threshold of likely relevance.

The defendant was charged with nine counts of wilfully collecting and using personal health information without authority under the Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004.

The defendant brought Charter applications under section 11(b) for unreasonable delay and under section 7 for abuse of process and selective prosecution.

The court found a violation of section 11(b) due to Crown delay of 16 months and 10 days, which exceeded the Morin guidelines by 6 months and 10 days.

The court found actual and inferred prejudice to the defendant.

The court rejected the section 7 application, finding no abuse of process.

A stay of proceedings was granted pursuant to section 11(b) and section 24(1) of the Charter.

The appellant, a psychiatric nurse, appealed a finding of professional misconduct and the resulting penalty imposed by the Discipline Committee of the College of Nurses.

The misconduct involved an improper romantic relationship with a former patient.

The Divisional Court upheld the finding of misconduct, concluding the Panel's decision was reasonable and supported by evidence.

The College's cross-appeal regarding the standard of proof for sexual misconduct was dismissed.

However, the Court allowed the appeal on penalty, finding the 18-month suspension and 24-month restriction on psychiatric nursing excessive for a first-time young offender.

The suspension was reduced to six months and the restriction was set aside.

The respondents in a human rights complaint sought to reschedule an Initial Conference Call and requested early disclosure and copies of correspondence between the Tribunal, the Commission, and the self-represented complainant.

The Tribunal noted that the call had already proceeded because the respondents failed to obtain consent to reschedule.

The Tribunal dismissed the requests for early disclosure and correspondence, noting that disclosure dates were already set and the Tribunal does not engage in ex parte communications.

The Commission was directed to provide the complainant's address for service.

The Member faced allegations of professional misconduct before the Discipline Committee of the College of Nurses of Ontario.

The allegations included falsifying timesheets, using an unsafe makeshift pacifier for a newborn, and providing false information on an employment application.

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

The panel found the Member committed professional misconduct and accepted a Joint Submission as to Penalty, ordering a reprimand, a 30-day suspension, and conditions on her certificate of registration including an ethics course and practice consultations.

The appellant brought a motion for summary judgment to enforce its security in convertible subordinated debentures against the respondent Brookfield, a wholly owned subsidiary of the issuer BCED.

The motion was dismissed, and the appellant appealed.

The Court of Appeal upheld the motion judge's interpretation of the trust indenture, finding that the term 'Company' in Article VII, section 7.01 referred only to BCED and its successors, not its wholly owned subsidiaries.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellants appealed an order setting aside a prior court order enforcing an arbitral interim order and declaring the arbitration terminated.

The Court of Appeal held there was no evidentiary basis for the conclusion that the arbitration board had refused to hear the respondent's variation application or that the respondent lacked the ability to pursue that remedy.

Without proof of a new material fact arising after the earlier order, the motion judge had no basis to set aside that order.

The appeal was allowed, the motion judge's order was set aside, and the earlier enforcement order was restored with costs to the appellants.

The appellant nurse appealed a decision of the Discipline Committee finding her guilty of professional misconduct relating to the misappropriation of narcotics.

During the discipline hearing, it was revealed that a panel member served on a hospital committee with the principal witness against the appellant, but this was not disclosed until deliberations had begun.

The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, finding that the undisclosed relationship and subsequent conduct created a reasonable apprehension of bias that vitiated the panel's decision.

Given the circumstantial evidence, poor hospital record-keeping, and the passage of time, the Court quashed the decision and ordered a stay of proceedings rather than a rehearing.