Michael Mandarino

This decision determines the costs of a successful motion brought by the defendant, 485 Logan Developments Inc., to declare the plaintiff's construction lien expired.

The court found that the plaintiff had engaged in 'bootstrapping' by performing minor work solely to fabricate a new lien period after the original had expired.

Under section 86(1) of the Construction Act, such abusive conduct justified an award of substantial indemnity costs.

Consequently, the court ordered the plaintiff to pay the defendant $45,000 in substantial indemnity costs within 45 days.

The court considered a motion by 485 Logan Developments Inc. to declare a construction lien registered by Accurate General Contracting Ltd. expired for failure to preserve and perfect the lien in time.

The court found that Accurate’s alleged post-completion work did not extend the lien period, characterizing it as “bootstrapping.” The lien was declared expired, the action dismissed, and damages for the lien bond premium were awarded to Logan.

The moving party sought leave to appeal a prior decision of the Superior Court of Justice.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal.

As no costs outlines were filed, the court ordered that no costs be awarded.

The defendant, 485 Logan Developments Inc., brought a motion under section 44(5)(b) of the Construction Act to reduce the security it posted for a claim for lien registered by the plaintiff, Maple Drywall Inc., relating to a stacked condominium project.

The court found a genuine issue of fact as to whether an "overage" amount was part of the contract price and thus properly included in the lien, but determined that 30% of the overage was not owed, requiring a reduction in posted security.

The court also awarded damages to Logan for excessive interest paid on the lien bond and partial indemnity costs to Maple, reflecting the parties' relative success and conduct.

The moving parties sought leave to appeal a costs endorsement.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal in writing.

Costs of the motion were awarded to the responding party in the fixed amount of $5,000 all-inclusive.

A surety (Westport) brought an interpleader motion seeking a declaration of priority over funds awarded to a subcontractor (High Tech) in an ODACC adjudication, or alternatively, for the funds to be paid into court.

The funds were held in trust by the general contractor's (BDA) counsel due to competing claims.

The court found that Westport, as surety, had a valid security interest and trust claim over the funds based on the indemnity agreement with High Tech.

The court rejected High Tech's argument that the Construction Act's prompt payment provisions gave it priority.

However, the court also found that there were triable issues regarding Westport's good faith in processing claims and making advances, which precluded a final order for immediate payment to Westport.

Therefore, the court ordered the disputed funds to be paid into court pending the outcome of ongoing litigation between the parties.

The College of Nurses of Ontario alleged that the member committed professional misconduct by submitting false claims to her employer's group benefit plan.

The member admitted to the allegations, acknowledging she submitted claims for products she did not receive and received products not covered by the plan, totalling $2,325.

The Discipline Committee accepted an Agreed Statement of Facts and found the member committed professional misconduct.

The Committee accepted a Joint Submission on Order, imposing a reprimand, a three-month suspension, and terms, conditions, and limitations on her certificate of registration.

The Member, a Registered Nurse, admitted to committing professional misconduct by submitting false claims to her employer's group benefit plan for products she did not receive or that were not covered.

The Discipline Committee found that the Member contravened standards of practice, misappropriated property, falsified records, and engaged in dishonourable and unprofessional conduct.

The Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, a 3-month suspension, and terms and conditions including meetings with a regulatory expert and employer notification.

The College of Nurses of Ontario alleged that the respondent registered nurse committed professional misconduct by submitting false claims to her employer's group benefit plan, totaling approximately $9,740.

The respondent admitted to the allegations, acknowledging that she misappropriated property, falsified records, and engaged in dishonourable and unprofessional conduct.

The Discipline Committee accepted an agreed statement of facts and a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, a three-month suspension of her certificate of registration, and the imposition of terms, conditions, and limitations including meetings with a regulatory expert and employer notification.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought disciplinary proceedings against a registered nurse for failing to conduct required periodic assessments of a patient in a seniors mental health unit and for falsifying the patient's health record to indicate the checks had occurred.

The patient was subsequently found deceased in her room.

The nurse admitted to the allegations of professional misconduct.

The Discipline Committee accepted an agreed statement of facts and a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, a three-month suspension, and terms and conditions on the nurse's certificate of registration.

The Member, a registered nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct relating to numerous medication errors, failure to maintain sterile techniques, failure to properly assess and document patient care, and failure to keep records.

The hearing proceeded on an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission on Order.

The Discipline Committee found that the Member committed professional misconduct by contravening standards of practice, failing to keep records, and engaging in dishonourable and unprofessional conduct.

The Committee accepted the joint submission on penalty, ordering an oral reprimand, a four-month suspension, and various terms, conditions, and limitations on the Member's certificate of registration, including remediation and employer notification.

The member, a registered nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for failing to maintain therapeutic boundaries, engaging in financial abuse, and practicing in a conflict of interest.

The member admitted to purchasing a vulnerable patient's home and assets below market value, accepting power of attorney for the patient, and being named a beneficiary in the patient's will.

The Discipline Committee accepted an agreed statement of facts and a joint submission on penalty, ordering an 8-month suspension, a reprimand, and terms, conditions, and limitations on the member's certificate of registration.

The member, a registered nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for verbally abusing and making inappropriate, non-therapeutic comments to three vulnerable patients in a mental health inpatient unit.

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

The Discipline Committee found the member committed professional misconduct, including verbal abuse and disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional conduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a five-month suspension, a reprimand, and terms including meetings with a regulatory expert and employer notification.

The Member, a registered nurse, was found to have committed professional misconduct after stealing oxycodone tablets from a home care patient and subsequently failing to report the resulting criminal charges and convictions to the College.

The Discipline Committee accepted an agreed statement of facts and a joint submission on penalty, ordering a five-month suspension, a reprimand, and various conditions on the Member's certificate of registration, including meetings with a regulatory expert and employer notification requirements.

The Member, a registered nurse, was found guilty of professional misconduct after being convicted of fraud over $5,000 under the Criminal Code.

The Member had misappropriated $17,000 from the spouse of a former client by using her credit card and transferring funds without authorization.

The Discipline Committee accepted an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission on Order, imposing a reprimand, a five-month suspension, and various terms, conditions, and limitations on the Member's certificate of registration.

The Member, a Registered Nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for failing to maintain therapeutic boundaries with a vulnerable client and failing to adequately document care.

The Member engaged in a personal relationship with the client, exchanged over 1,100 text messages of a personal nature, and took the client bowling.

She also failed to document her care in a timely manner and failed to complete an incident report.

The Discipline Committee accepted an Agreed Statement of Facts and found the Member committed professional misconduct.

A joint submission on penalty was accepted, resulting in a reprimand, a five-month suspension, and terms, conditions, and limitations on her certificate of registration.

The applicant, a nurse employed by a hospital, was sued for invasion of privacy after she repeatedly accessed a patient's private hospital records without authorization and without being involved in the patient's care.

The insurance carriers appealed a lower court decision requiring them to defend the nurse under a commercial general liability policy.

The Court of Appeal upheld the lower court's decision, finding that the policy language covering invasion of privacy, including intrusion upon seclusion, clearly applied to the unauthorized access to medical records.

The court held that such conduct arose from the hospital's operations and fell within the scope of coverage intended by the policy.

The applicant, a hospital employee, sought a declaration that the respondent insurers owed her a duty to defend a civil action.

The underlying action alleged the applicant committed the tort of intrusion upon seclusion by repeatedly accessing a patient's medical records without authorization.

The insurers denied coverage, arguing the applicant was not acting under the direction of the hospital and the claim did not arise from the hospital's operations.

The court held that the policy's privacy coverage inherently included unauthorized access to records, and that the collection and maintenance of medical records fell within the hospital's operations.

The application was allowed, and the insurers were ordered to defend the action.

The Member, a registered nurse, faced a discipline hearing for professional misconduct after his login credentials were used to access the electronic medical records of a high-profile patient not under his care.

The Member admitted to failing to log out of his workstation, which allowed the unauthorized access.

The Discipline Committee accepted an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission on Order, finding the Member guilty of professional misconduct.

The Member was reprimanded, suspended for one month, and subjected to terms and conditions including meetings with a nursing expert and employer notification.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought disciplinary proceedings against a Registered Practical Nurse for accessing the electronic health records of 25 clients without consent, authorization, or professional purpose.

The Member admitted to the allegations, acknowledging that she accessed the records out of curiosity, for educational purposes, and in one instance, to confirm an address due to a personal dispute.

The Discipline Committee found the Member committed professional misconduct, noting her actions were unprofessional and dishonourable.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a reprimand, a two-month suspension, and imposed terms, conditions, and limitations on her certificate of registration, including meetings with a nursing expert and employer notification requirements.