ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
MCRAE, DUNNET AND JENNINGS JJ.
B E T W E E N:
THE PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS COUNCIL OF ONTARIO
Plaintiff
(Respondent)
- and -
GEORGE W. VANDENBERG
Defendant
(Appellant)
Michael D. Lipton, Q.C. and
Kevin J. Weber, for the Plaintiff (Respondent)
Duncan P. Read, for the Defendant (Appellant)
HEARD: October 23, 2003
MCRAE J.: (Orally)
1George W. Vandenberg, a chartered accountant, appeals from the decision of The Public Accountants Council for the Province of Ontario, dated June 24, 2002, wherein his licence to practice public accounting was revoked.
2Section 18(1) of the Public Accountancy Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.37, provides that a person who has been adjudged bankrupt may have his or her licence revoked. In August of 2000, the appellant was adjudged bankrupt because of circumstances unrelated to his practice as an accountant.
3Council convened a hearing on December 6, 2000 to inquire whether his licence should be revoked. The appellant appeared at the hearing with a fellow accountant, Christina Hutton. He was advised of his right to counsel and asked if he desired an adjournment to obtain counsel. He stated that he was prepared to proceed without counsel. After a hearing in which he and Ms. Hutton both participated, Council treated him fairly (in our view). Council decided to adjourn the hearing, and determined that the appellant’s licence would not be revoked subject to his undertaking to comply with conditions as follows:
“(i) I will not practice as a public accountant until such time as I have received an absolute discharge from bankruptcy and the earlier of my reinstatement with the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario or the re-convening of this hearing and until I have so notified the Registrar in a form satisfactory to him;
(ii) I will co-operate with the Registrar in inspection(s) of my practice to provide an overview of my activities and adherence to these terms;
(iii) I will diligently pursue obtaining my absolute discharge from bankruptcy and will keep the Registrar informed of progress in this regard;
(iv) I will diligently pursue my full re-instatement by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario and will provide Council with all documents and correspondence in relation to this matter;
(v) If requested by the Registrar I will attend the re-convened hearing of Council in relation to the possible revocation of the licence issued to me to practice as a public accountant, scheduled for June 25, 2001 or such other date as may be determined by Council.”
4On June 24th, 2002, the Council met in the absence of the appellant and his solicitor although both had been notified of the hearing and the solicitor for the appellant had requested that the hearing be adjourned. By letter dated June 14th, Council replied to the request in these words:
“We acknowledge receipt by Fax of your letter of today’s date requesting an adjournment of the scheduled resumption of the hearing for George W. Vandenberg. We confirm that your letter will be presented to the members of Council at the resumption of your client’s hearing together with copies of the other material introduced at the commencement of the hearing and the report provided to you with Council’s letter of June 7, 2002.
We reiterate that prior to the hearing date it would be prudent for Mr. Vandenberg to arrange for completion of the requested inspection with which he undertook to co-operate with the Registrar. This would be to provide assurances that his undertaking has been complied with. Furthermore, we recommend that someone appear in person prepared to respond to any questions which may be raised by Council members in connection with your request for an adjournment.”
5On June 24th, the matter proceeded in the absence of the appellant and his counsel. The reasons for decision state in part:
“Council notes that Mr. Vandenberg’s counsel, Duncan P. Read, has requested an adjournment of the reconvening of this hearing by reason of an unspecified conflicting commitment in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. Under ordinary circumstances, Council would not be adverse to granting an adjournment. However, Council is of the view that the circumstances in this case are far from ordinary. The uncontroverted evidence indicates that, despite the terms of the undertaking to which Mr. Vandenberg agreed, both before Council at the conclusion of the initial hearing and subsequently in writing, he practised public accounting during that period in which he undertook not to do so, he failed to keep the Registrar informed of his progress in pursuing his absolute discharge from bankruptcy, he failed to provide Council with all documents and correspondence in relation to his reinstatement by the ICAO and he failed to co-operate with the Registrar in carrying out an inspection of his practice. According to his Inspection Report, the Registrar has attempted to arrange for an inspection of Mr. Vandenberg’s practice since November of 2001. Had Mr. Vandenberg co-operated with an inspection by the Registrar over the course of the last seven months and that this inspection had resulted in a report satisfactory to Council any risk to the public posed by the granting of such an adjournment would have been adequately addressed.”
6We agree that it was not unreasonable for Council to proceed as they did.
7This is a case where the appellant was dealt with fairly but for reasons known only to himself he steadfastly and consistently refused to co-operate with Council. There was ample evidence before Council on June 24th to revoke his licence. For those reasons, the appeal is dismissed.
8Costs are fixed and payable to the respondent in the amount of $7,500.
MCRAE J.
DUNNET J.
JENNINGS J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: October 23, 2003
Date of Release: November 5, 2003
COURT FILE NO.: 610/2002
DATE: 20031023
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
mcrae, dunnet and jennings jj.
B E T W E E N:
THE PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS COUNCIL OF ONTARIO
Plaintiff
(Respondent)
- and -
GEORGE W. VANDENBERG
Defendant
(Appellant)
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
MCRAE J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: October 23, 2003
Date of Release: November 5, 2003