Neil Perrier

The appellants, a professional engineer and his company, appealed a decision of the Discipline Committee of the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario refusing to award them costs after staying a disciplinary proceeding against them.

The Discipline Committee had stayed the proceeding indefinitely because the referral lacked sufficient detail to identify the complaint.

However, the Committee later refused to award costs, finding the proceeding was not unwarranted.

The Divisional Court held that the decision to deny costs was unreasonable, as the Committee had already concluded the allegations were so deficient that a finding of professional misconduct could not succeed.

The Court awarded the appellants $26,000 in costs for the hearing and the appeal.

The appellant lawyer appealed a decision of the Law Society Appeal Panel finding him guilty of professional misconduct for refusing to attend an interview with a Society investigator.

The appellant argued that the Law Society Act only authorized the Society to require the provision of information, not attendance at an oral interview.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the standard of review was reasonableness and that the Society's broad duty to protect the public interest required effective investigation powers, including the authority to compel oral interviews.