Ontario College of Teachers v. Andrei, 2025 ONOCT 11

DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS

Citation: Ontario College of Teachers v Andrei 2025 ONOCT 11

Date: 2025-02-28

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 Andreea Octavia Andrei, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.

BETWEEN:

ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS

– and –

ANDREEA OCTAVIA ANDREI (REGISTRATION #511823)

PANEL: Damienne Lebrun-Reid, Chair Jim Marinow Terrence Singh, OCT

HEARD: February 24, 2025

COUNSEL: Zirka Jakibchuk, for the Ontario College of Teachers Brett McGarry, for Andreea Octavia Andrei Rebecca Durcan, 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.

By order of Justice of the Peace P. Harris of the Ontario Court of Justice, there is also a publication ban on any information that could identify the victim or a witness in this matter, pursuant to section 486.4 of the Criminal Code.

1This proceeding was heard electronically before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Panel”) of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) on February 24, 2025, in accordance with rule 8.01 of the Rules of Procedure of the Discipline Committee and of the Fitness to Practise Committee.

2Andreea Octavia Andrei (the “Member”) did not attend the hearing but had legal representation. The Panel was advised at the outset of the hearing that the parties had entered into an agreement with respect to the hearing.

A. PUBLICATION BAN

3The Panel ordered a publication ban pursuant to subsection 32.1(3) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (the “Act”), which makes such an order mandatory. Accordingly, 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.

4The Panel also received a certified transcript of the Proceedings at Guilty Plea from the Member’s criminal proceeding before the Honourable Justice H. Perkins-McVey on April 19, 2023 (Exhibit 2 at Appendix E). In these proceedings before the Ontario Court of Justice, an order restricting publication was made on April 4, 2022, by Justice of the Peace P. Harris, pursuant to section 486.4 of the Criminal Code of Canada. The Panel is required to uphold this publication ban. Accordingly, any information that could identify the victim or a witness involved in this matter shall not be published in any document or broadcast or transmitted in any way.

B. THE ALLEGATIONS

5The allegations against the Member in the Notice of Hearing dated January 23, 2025 (Exhibit 1) are as follows:

IT IS ALLEGED that Andreea Octavia Andrei is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in the Act in that:

(a) she abused a student or students psychologically or emotionally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.2);

(b) she abused a student or students sexually, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.3) and/or engaged in sexual abuse of a student or students as defined in section 1 of the Act;

(c) she engaged in sexual misconduct as defined in section 1 of the Act;

(d) she contravened a law, the contravention of which is relevant to the member’s suitability to hold a certificate of qualification and registration, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(16);

(e) she 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);

(f) she engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).

C. AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS

6College Counsel presented the Panel with the parties’ Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea (Exhibit 2), which provides the following:

1. Andreea Octavia Andrei is a member of the College. Her membership status has been ‘Inactive/Not Practising’ since May 7, 2022. Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “A” is a copy of the Ontario College of Teachers Registered Member Information with respect to the Member.

2. At all material times, the Member was employed as a teacher at [XXX] High School (the “School”) in Ottawa, Ontario.

3. At all material times, Student 1 was a male student at the School.

4. At all material times, Student 2 was a female student at the School or had recently graduated from the School.

5. Between in or around [XXX] and in or around [XXX], the Member developed personal relationships with Student 1 and Student 2.

6. The Member’s relationships with each student initially revolved around tutoring and extra-curricular assistance and gradually progressed to general mentoring and then personal and social relationships.

Student 1

7. After Student 1 turned 18 years old, but was still a Grade [XXX] student at the School, the Member told Student 1 that she had developed feelings for him and propositioned him over text message for sexual activity that the Member’s husband could watch them engage in. The Member also sent Student 1 a revealing photo of herself.

8. The Member’s conduct made Student 1 feel uncomfortable and he cut off all contact with the Member.

9. Student 1 initially did not want to attend his high school graduation to avoid contact with the Member, but ultimately decided to go on the condition that the Member have no contact with Student 1 or his parents.

Student 2

10. Student 2 graduated from high school in June [XXX] and relocated to a different city in Ontario to study at university.

11. Student 2 did not have a relationship with her mother and came to see the Member as a close personal mentor and mother figure while she was a student at the School. Student 2 maintained a personal relationship with the Member after graduation.

12. On October [XXX], shortly before Student 2 turned 18, the Member and her husband travelled to visit Student 2 at university (as they occasionally did). The Member and her husband took Student 2 out for dinner and the three ate and consumed alcohol together.

13. During the conversation at dinner, the Member and her husband shared details about their own sexual preferences, including wanting a threesome, but did not say it should be with Student 2.

14. The three returned to Student 2’s residence after dinner for a short period of time. The Member’s husband complimented Student 2 on her physical appearance, but there was no physical touching, or any sexual propositions, at that time.

15. In November [XXX], after Student 2 turned 18, she visited the Member and her husband at their residence. During this visit, the Member’s husband conducted a meditation exercise with Student 2 on the floor near the Member’s and her husband’s fireplace. The Member’s husband laid Student 2 down and asked her to calm her muscles as they were tense. He then massaged her from the feet up, over her clothes, pointing out the chakras along the way.

16. Student 2 reported to the police that the belly chakra made her feel uncomfortable, but she did not say anything in hopes of maintaining her personal relationship with the Member and her husband.

17. In January [XXX], Student 2 told the Member on the phone that she was uncomfortable with the Member’s husband. The Member then passed the phone to her husband who had a conversation with Student 2.

18. Student 2 described the conversation with the Member’s husband as inappropriate and she said that it made her feel uncomfortable. Shortly after this conversation, Student 2 ceased contact with the Member and her husband.

19. During Student 2’s personal relationship with the Member, the Member told Student 2 about her romantic feelings for Student 1 and her disappointment about how that relationship had ended.

Criminal Proceedings

20. On or about April 4, 2022, the Member was arrested and charged with:

(a) Between the 1st day of September in the year [XXX] and the 29th day of January [XXX] at the City of Ottawa in the East/De L’Est Region did, being a person who was in a position of trust or authority towards a young person or was in a relationship with a young person that was exploitative of that young person, for a sexual purpose invite/counsel/incite that young person, namely Student 2, to directly or indirectly touch with a part of her body the body of a third party, contrary to Section 153 subsection (1.1) of the Criminal Code (Canada) (the “Code”);

(b) Between the 1st day of September in the year [XXX] and the 29th day of January in the year [XXX] at the City of Ottawa in the East/De L’Est Region did commit a sexual assault on Student 2, contrary to Section 271 of the Code; and

(c) Between the 1st day of September in the year [XXX] and the 29th day of January in the year [XXX] at the City of Ottawa in the East/De L’Est Region did, being a person who was in a position of trust and authority towards a young person or was in a relationship with a young person, for a sexual purpose invite/counsel/incite that young person, namely Student 1, to directly or indirectly touch with a part of her body the body of a third party, contrary to section 153 subsection (1.1) of the Code.

21. On April 19, 2023, the Member pled guilty to the lesser included offence of simple assault on Student 2, contrary to section 266 of the Code, before the Honourable Justice H. Perkins-McVey in Ottawa. The remaining criminal charges were withdrawn by the Crown.

22. On June 20, 2023, the Member was given a suspended sentence and three years’ probation and was made subject to a number of ancillary orders, before the Honourable Justice H. Perkins-McVey in Ottawa.

23. The Member did not appeal her conviction or sentence and the appeal period has expired.

24. Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “B” are certified and non-certified copies of the Court Information sworn on April 30, 2024, including the appearances and disposition, in the criminal proceedings before the Honourable Justice H. Perkins-McVey of the Ontario Court of Justice.

25. Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “C” is a certified copy of the Adult Probation Order, sworn April 30, 2024.

26. Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “D” is a certified copy of the Non-Communication Order, sworn April 30, 2024.

27. Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “E” is a certified transcript of the Proceedings at Guilty Plea before the Honourable Justice H. Perkins-McVey of the Ontario Court of Justice, dated June 4, 2023.

28. Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “F” is a certified transcript of the Reasons for Sentence before the Honourable Justice H. Perkins-McVey of the Ontario Court of Justice, dated August 8, 2023.

GUILTY PLEA

29. By this document, the Member admits the truth of the facts and appendices referred to in paragraphs 1-28 above (the “Admitted Facts”).

30. The Member hereby acknowledges that the conduct set out at paragraphs 5-9, 11-22 and 24-28 of the Admitted Facts constitutes professional misconduct and pleads guilty to the allegations of professional misconduct against her, being more particularly breaches of: subsections 1(7.2), 1(7.3), 1(16), 1(18) and 1(19) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. The Member also acknowledges that she engaged in the sexual abuse of Student 1 and sexual misconduct with Student 2, as defined in section 1 of the Ontario College of Teachers Act.

31. By this document, the Member states that:

(a) she understands fully the nature of the allegations against her;

(b) she understands that by signing this document she is consenting to the evidence as set out in the Admitted Facts being presented to the Discipline Committee;

(c) she understands that by pleading guilty to the allegations, she is waiving the right to require the College to prove the case against her and the right to have a hearing;

(d) she 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 her name, shall be published in the official publication of the College;

(e) she understands that any agreement between her and counsel for the College with respect to the penalty proposed in this document does not bind the Discipline Committee;

(f) she understands and acknowledges that she is executing this agreement voluntarily, unequivocally, and having obtained or had the opportunity to obtain the advice of legal counsel.

32. In light of the Admitted Facts and circumstances and the plea of guilt, the Ontario College of Teachers and the Member submit that the Discipline Committee find the Member guilty of professional misconduct.

D. DECISION

7Having considered the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and the submissions of the parties, the Panel rendered an oral decision on February 24, 2025, finding that the Member engaged in acts of professional misconduct as alleged, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(7.2), 1(7.3), 1(16), 1(18) and 1(19). The Panel found that the Member also engaged in sexual abuse of Student 1 and sexual misconduct of Student 2 as defined in section 1 of the Act.

E. REASONS FOR DECISION

8The Member admitted the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 28 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and admitted the allegations of professional misconduct against her. She acknowledged and the Panel accepts that the conduct set out in paragraphs 5-9, 11-22 and 24-28 of the Admitted Facts constitute professional misconduct under the heads of misconduct set out above. The Admitted Facts demonstrate that the Member engaged in personal and inappropriate relationships with Student 1 and Student 2. They also demonstrate that on April 19, 2023, the Member plead guilty to assaulting Student 2, contrary to section 266 of the Code.

9The Panel finds that the Member abused a student or students psychologically or emotionally, contrary to subsection 1(7.2) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. The Admitted Facts demonstrate that the Member developed personal and inappropriate relationships with Student 1 and Student 2. In particular, the Member told Student 1 she had feelings for him and propositioned him over text message for sexual activity. The Member also sent a revealing photo of herself to Student 1. This inappropriate behaviour made Student 1 uncomfortable. Further, as a result of the Member’s conduct towards Student 1, he initially did not want to go to his graduation but eventually went on the condition that the Member have no contact with him or his parents. As for Student 2, the Member took on a pseudo-parental role towards her while she was a student at the School. The Member maintained a personal relationship with Student 2 after graduation which evolved into an inappropriate relationship. The Member took Student 2 (who was not yet 18) out to dinner and consumed alcohol with her and the Member’s husband. During the dinner conversation, the Member and her husband shared details of their sexual preferences with Student 2. After Student 2 turned 18 years old, the Member’s husband massaged Student 2 over her clothes, which made her feel uncomfortable. The Panel acknowledges that Student 2 was over 18 and not a “student” of the Member at the time (or at the Member’s school) in question. The Act does not define a “student” for the purposes of this allegation (unlike for the sexual abuse and sexual misconduct allegations below). However, taking a contextual and purposive approach to the mandate of the College, the Panel accepts that Student 2 was still a “student” for the purposes of this allegation. Teachers are required to maintain appropriate boundaries and consider students’ well-being and psychological and emotional safety. The Member violated those boundaries by engaging in inappropriate behaviour and remarks of a sexual nature with both students.

10The Admitted Facts demonstrate that the Member engaged in sexual abuse of a Student 1 as defined in section 1 of the Act, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97 subsection 1(7.3). The Panel is satisfied that Student 1 meets the definition of “student” for the purposes of a finding of sexual abuse. Section 1(2) at paragraph 2 of the Act defines “student” as:

A student of any age who, at the time the behaviour, remarks or conduct occurred or were made, was enrolled in a school or private school in Ontario, within the meaning of the Education Act if, at that time,

i. the member was one of the student’s teachers,

iii. the member assisted in extracurricular activities, including coaching in a sport, and the member and the student dealt with each other directly in the course of the extracurricular activities, or […]

The Admitted Facts state that Student 1 was a grade [XXX] student at the Member’s School at the time of the behaviour and that the Member was involved in extra-curricular activities and tutoring with Student 1.

11The definition of sexual abuse includes “behaviour or remarks of a sexual nature by the member towards the student”. Subsection 1(7) of the Act recognises that for the purposes of the definition of “sexual abuse” behaviour, conduct or remarks includes acts or remarks done or made by electronic means. The Member engaged in sexual abuse of Student 1 when she told him that she had developed feelings for him and propositioned him over text message for sexual activity that the Member’s husband could watch them engage in and when she sent him a revealing photo of herself. Such conduct meets the definition of sexual abuse and includes acts and remarks done by electronic means.

12The Member admits and the Panel finds that she also engaged in sexual misconduct of Student 2 as defined in section 1 of the Act. Section 1 of the Act defines “sexual misconduct” as:

inappropriate behaviour or remarks of a sexual nature by the member that is not sexual abuse of a student, where,

(a) one or more students are exposed to the behaviour or remarks, or the member knows or ought to know that one or more students are likely to be exposed to the behaviour or remarks, and

(b) a reasonable person would expect the behaviour or remarks to have the effect of,

(i) causing distress to a student exposed to the behaviour or remarks,

(ii) being detrimental to the physical or mental well-being of a student, or

(iii) creating a negative environment at a school for a student exposed to the behaviour or remarks.

13The Panel has based its findings of sexual misconduct towards Student 2 on the Member’s conduct while Student 2 was under 18 years old (i.e., before November [XXX]). The Panel notes the definition of “student” at subsection 1(2) of the Act includes, in relevant part, “Any other child who, at the time the behaviour, remarks or conduct occurred or were made, was under 18 years old [….]”.

14According to the Admitted Facts, the Member and her husband visited Student 2 at university on October [XXX]. They took Student 2 out to dinner, where they shared details about their own sexual preferences, including wanting a threesome (though they did not say that it should be with Student 2). Student 2 was not yet 18 years old at the time of this comment. The Member’s misconduct does not amount to sexual abuse as the Admitted Facts do not demonstrate Student 2 was the object of the Member’s sexualized remark: Ontario College of Teachers v. Walker, 2022 ONOCT 29 (“Walker”). However, by her conduct, the Member exposed Student 2 to inappropriate behaviour and remarks of a sexual nature. The Panel finds that a reasonable person would expect the Member’s remarks to cause distress or have a detrimental impact on Student 2 who had come to see the Member as a close personal mentor and mother figure.

15The Panel finds that the Member contravened a law, the contravention of which is relevant to her suitability to hold a certificate of qualification and registration, contrary to subsection 1(16) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. On April 19, 2023, the Member plead guilty to an offence of assault on Student 2, contrary to section 266 of the Criminal Code. The Member was given a suspended sentence and three years probation and was made subject to a number of ancillary orders. The Member did not appeal her conviction and the time for an appeal has expired. Members of the teaching profession must be trusted to work closely with and ensure the safety and well-being of students. The Member’s conviction of assault on Student 2 demonstrates that she contravened a law relevant to her suitability to hold a certificate.

16The Admitted Facts demonstrate that the Member committed acts that would reasonably be regarded as disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97 subsection 1(18). The Member’s behaviour can be characterised by all three terms. The Member abused her position of trust and authority to develop personal and inappropriate relationships with Student 1 and Student 2. The Member propositioned Student 1 for sexual activity and sent him a revealing photo of herself. She shared details of her and her husbands’ sexual preferences with Student 2. The Member’s conduct demonstrates significant moral failings that casts serious doubt on her ability to practise the profession.

17Finally, the Panel finds that the Member engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19). The public trust in the teaching profession is eroded when members abuse their position of trust and authority to engage in sexual abuse and sexual misconduct of students. Students, parents and the public expect teachers to ensure the students’ safety and well-being. Further, Member’s Counsel noted that the Member’s criminal proceedings was covered in the media (i.e., newspaper coverage). The Panel notes that the public’s awareness demonstrates the harm to the reputation of the teaching profession.

F. PENALTY DECISION

18The parties entered into a Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 3), which was presented to the Panel. In an oral decision rendered on February 24, 2025, the Panel accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty and made the following order:

1. The Member is directed to receive a written reprimand, and the fact of the reprimand is to be recorded on the Register of the Ontario College of Teachers;

2. The Registrar is directed to immediately revoke the Certificate of Qualification and Registration of the Member.

G. REASONS FOR PENALTY DECISION

19The Member’s professional misconduct includes sexual abuse of a student as described in section 30.2(2) of the Act. Section 30.2(1) of the Act provides that the Panel must, for findings of sexual abuse of a student, make an order: (1) requiring that the Member be reprimanded by the Panel; and (2) directing the Registrar to revoke the Member’s certificate of qualification and registration. Section 30.2 of the Act came into effect on April 3, 2019, and would not generally apply to misconduct before that date, except as provided by section 63.2 of the Act. According to section 63.2 of the Act, section 30.2 of the Act may apply retrospectively to sexual abuse occurred before April 3, 2019, if no order has been made under subsection 30(4) of the Act before then. This condition is met in this case.

20The Panel accepts that it is unclear if the Member’s sexual abuse of Student 1 took place prior to or after April 3, 2019. However, in light of the fact that section 63.2 of the Act mandates that section 30.2 is to apply even if the sexual abuse occurred prior to April 3, 2019, the Panel is satisfied that it has jurisdiction to make this order even without having the exact date of the sexual abuse.

21The Panel makes both of the orders required by section 30.2 of the Act and notes that it has no discretion in this regard.

22The Panel recognizes that it may also order costs or a fine in accordance with subsection 30(5) of the Act but notes that the parties are jointly asking it to confine its order to the mandatory orders. The Panel finds it reasonable not to make these additional orders in light of the Member’s guilty plea and joint submission on penalty, particularly given the high threshold that must be met before rejecting a joint submission on penalty.

23The Panel denounces the Member’s misconduct in the strongest terms.