The accused, a psychological associate, was charged with three counts of fraud for allegedly misleading clients by using the title 'Doctor' and failing to explicitly identify himself as a psychological associate rather than a psychologist.
The clients had retained him for counseling and child custody assessments.
The court found that while the accused's use of the title 'Doctor' constituted a fraudulent act, the Crown failed to prove that this misrepresentation caused any financial deprivation or risk of loss to the complainants, as they likely would have retained him regardless of his specific licensing status.
Furthermore, the court found a reasonable doubt regarding whether the accused had the requisite mens rea for fraud.
The charges were dismissed.
