DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
IN THE MATTER OF the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 and the Regulation (Ontario Regulation 437/97) thereunder;
AND IN THE MATTER OF a discipline proceeding against
Christopher Anthony Prest, OCT, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
BETWEEN:
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
– and –
CHRISTOPHER ANTHONY PREST (REGISTRATION # 432495)
PANEL: Irene Dembek, OCT, Chair Sara Nouini, OCT Tom Potter
HEARD: April 29, 2019
Jason Bennett, for Ontario College of Teachers
Kirsty Niglas-Collins of KNC Law, for Christopher Anthony Prest
Rebecca Durcan of Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc, Independent Legal Counsel
PUBLICATION BAN: Pursuant to subsection 32.1(3) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, no person shall publish the identity of, or any information that could disclose the identity of, any person who is under 18 years old and is a witness in a hearing or is the subject of evidence in a hearing.
This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) on April 29, 2019 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) at Toronto.
A Notice of Hearing dated February 11, 2019 (Exhibit 1) was served on Christopher Anthony Prest (the “Member”), inviting him to participate in the scheduling of the hearing and specifying the allegations. The hearing was subsequently set for April 29, 2019.
The Member was in attendance for the hearing and had legal representation. The Committee was advised at the outset of the hearing that the parties had entered into an agreement with respect to the hearing.
THE ALLEGATIONS
The allegations against the Member in the Notice of Hearing are as follows:
IT IS ALLEGED that the Member is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (the “Act”) in that:
(a) he failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(5);
(b) he abused a student or students verbally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7);
(c) he abused a student or students psychologically or emotionally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.2);
(d) he failed to comply with the Education Act, Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1990, chapter E.2, and specifically subsection 264(1) thereof or the Regulations made under that Act, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(15);
(e) he committed acts that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(18); and
(f) he engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS
College Counsel presented the Committee with the parties’ Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea (Exhibit 2), which provides the following:
Christopher Anthony Prest is a member of the Ontario College of Teachers. Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “A” is a copy of the Ontario College of Teachers Registered Member Information with respect to the Member.
At all material times, the Member was employed by the District School Board of Niagara (the “Board”) as a [XXX] teacher at [XXX] School (the “School”) in St. Catharines, Ontario.
On February 24, 2017, the Board notified the Ontario College of Teachers that the Member had been suspended without pay for 15 days (eventually reduced to 10 days) for using inappropriate language in the presence of students and making offensive comments to students between September 1, 2016 and January 31, 2017, including:
(a) Do you have a mental disability?;
(b) shit;
(c) asses;
(d) conversation whore;
(e) fuck;
(f) Who’s the asshole that did this?; and
(g) idiot.
Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “B” is a copy of the Board’s letter to the Ontario College of Teachers dated February 24, 2017.
On December 5, 2017, the Registrar of the Ontario College of Teachers initiated a complaint against the Member.
On February 15, 2018, the Member, through legal counsel, responded to the complaint by acknowledging that he had used inappropriate language in his classes from time to time and stating that he deeply regrets his actions.
If he were to testify, the Member would state that the conduct in question was largely attributable to stress created by a change in schools in or about 2013, frequent changes to his teaching assignments, and difficulty he had getting to know his students, other staff, and the various school environments.
If he were to testify, the Member would also state that he is deeply committed to addressing the underlying stress and anger that has negatively impacted his professional duties, and that he has taken steps to address those behaviours through professional counselling in order to ensure that no further incidents take place.
On December 11, 2018, a panel of the Investigation Committee of the Ontario College of Teachers referred this matter to the College’s Discipline Committee.
Guilty Plea
By this document1, the Member admits the truth of the facts and appendices referred to in paragraphs 1-8 above (the “Admitted Facts”).
The Member hereby acknowledges that paragraph 3 of the Admitted Facts constitutes conduct that is professional misconduct and pleads guilty to the allegations of professional misconduct against him, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97 subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(7.2), 1(15), 1(18) and 1(19).
By signing this document the Member states that:
(a) he understands fully the nature of the allegations against him;
(b) he understands that by signing this document he is consenting to the evidence as set out in the Admitted Facts being presented to the Discipline Committee;
(c) he understands that he is pleading guilty to the allegations, and is waiving the right to require the College to prove the case against him and the right to have a hearing;
(d) he understands that the Discipline Committee’s decision and reasons shall be published on the College’s website, and that a summary of the Discipline Committee’s decision and reasons, including his name, shall be published in the official publication of the College;
(e) he understands that any agreement between his counsel and the College with respect to the penalty does not bind the Discipline Committee; and
(f) he understands and acknowledges that he is executing this agreement voluntarily, unequivocally, and with the advice of legal counsel.
- In light of the Admitted Facts and circumstances and the plea of guilt, the College and the Member submit that the Discipline Committee find the Member guilty of professional misconduct.
DECISION
Having considered the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and the submissions of the College Counsel, which was supported by Member’s Counsel, the Committee rendered an oral decision on April 29, 2019 finding that the Member engaged in acts of professional misconduct as alleged, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(7.2), 1(15), 1(18) and 1(19).
REASONS FOR DECISION
The Member admitted the truth of the facts and appendices referred to in paragraphs 1 to 8 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and admitted the allegations of professional misconduct against him. He acknowledged and the Committee accepts that the Admitted Facts constitute conduct which is professional misconduct, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(7.2), 1(15), 1(18) and 1(19).
Paragraphs 3 and 5 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(5).
Paragraphs 3 and 5 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member abused a student or students verbally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7);
Paragraphs 3 and 5 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member abused a student or students psychologically or emotionally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.2);
Paragraphs 3 and 5 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member failed to comply with the Education Act, Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1990, chapter E.2, and specifically subsection 264(1) thereof or the Regulations made under that Act, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(15);
Paragraphs 3 and 5 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member committed acts that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(18).
Paragraphs 3 and 5 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
JOINT SUBMISSION ON PENALTY
Through a Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 3), the parties jointly submitted that the appropriate penalty to be imposed in this matter would be that the Committee:
direct that the Member appear before the Committee immediately following the hearing of this matter to receive a reprimand which will be delivered in person at the offices of the Ontario College of Teachers, 101 Bloor Street W., Toronto, Ontario, and that the fact of the reprimand be recorded on the Register of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “Register”); and
direct the Registrar to impose the following terms, conditions or limitations on the Member's Certificate of Qualification and Registration, and the fact of such terms, conditions or limitations are to be recorded on the Register until such time as they are fulfilled:
(a) within 90 days of the date of the Decision, Reasons for Decision and Order of the Discipline Committee, the Member shall enrol in and successfully complete at his own expense (i) a course of instruction in professional boundaries/boundary violations; and (ii) a course of instruction in anger management. Each course shall be pre-approved by the Registrar and be subject to the following conditions:
(i) the Member will provide to a course practitioner approved by the Registrar a copy of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and Joint Submission on Penalty documents made exhibits at the hearing of this matter, and the Decision, Reasons for Decision and Order of the Discipline Committee; and
(ii) upon review of the documents noted at paragraph (i) above, the course practitioner will provide to the Registrar, for approval, a syllabus for each of the proposed courses which specifically addresses the Discipline Committee's concerns regarding the Member's professional misconduct. Each syllabus proposed by the course practitioner shall also specify the length of each course to be undertaken by the Member, and the assignments to be completed by the Member; and
(b) within 30 days of his completion of the courses outlined in (a) above, the Member shall provide to the Registrar a written certificate from the course practitioner stating that the Member has successfully completed the courses and reporting on the progress of the Member with respect to addressing the outlined goals of the courses.
PENALTY DECISION
In an oral decision rendered on April 29, 2019 the Committee accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty presented by the parties and made an order in accordance with its terms, as set out above.
REASONS FOR PENALTY DECISION
The Committee accepts the penalty jointly proposed by the parties. The Committee recognizes that, once it ensures that it has jurisdiction to make the order requested, the law confines the Committee’s role to determining whether the proposed penalty is so unreasonable that accepting it would bring the administration of the discipline process into disrepute or be otherwise contrary to the public interest. The Committee finds that the penalty proposed in the Joint Submission on Penalty is proportionate to the misconduct committed by the Member and is reasonable given the circumstances of this case. The penalty proposed by the parties is also within a reasonable range, based on the following analogous cases presented by the parties: Ontario College of Teachers v. Bielby, 2018 ONOCT 38, Ontario College of Teachers v. Gefter, 2017 ONOCT 47 and Ontario College of Teachers v. Hockin, 2015 ONOCT 38. Both parties submitted that the imposition of costs was not warranted in this matter.
The Committee finds that the Member’s use of inappropriate language in the presence of students and his offensive, demeaning and disrespectful comments made to students warrant a reprimand by his peers. Members of the teaching profession are expected to serve as positive role models and to maintain appropriate professional boundaries with students. The Member fell short of meeting these expectations. The reprimand will allow the Committee to directly address its concerns with the Member and will serve as a specific deterrent. Recording the fact of the reprimand on the Register will serve as a general deterrent to other members of the profession.
In relation to the courses of instruction agreed upon by the parties, Member’s Counsel submitted that it was unusual for members to agree to complete two separate courses in relation to their professional misconduct, but that the Member was willing to do so in order to address his professional and personal development needs. The Committee accepts these submissions and finds that the courses of instruction regarding professional boundaries/boundary violations and anger management will assist in the rehabilitation of the Member. The coursework will remind the Member of his obligations as a teacher and will help him to make better decisions in any future interactions with students.
In relation to the issue of costs, the Committee accepts the parties’ joint position that the imposition of costs is not warranted. The Member was cooperative throughout the disciplinary process.
The Committee is satisfied that the penalty is appropriate in the circumstances and meets the principle of serving and protecting the public interest.
Date: May 2, 2019
Irene Dembek, OCT
Chair, Discipline Panel
Sara Nouini, OCT
Member, Discipline Panel
Tom Potter
Member, Discipline Panel