ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
B E T W E E N:
DR. KUNJ BHARDWAJ Applicant
- and -
COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS OF ONTARIO Respondent
Joseph Markin, for the Applicant Lisa Brownstone, for the Respondent
HEARD: November 8, 2004
Oral Reasons for Judgment
CARNWATH J.: (Orally)
1Pursuant to s.83(3) of the Health Professions Procedural Code, the Quality Assurance Committee of the College of Physicians & Surgeons of Ontario disclosed to the College’s Executive Committee its opinion that Dr. Bhardwaj may be incompetent.
2At the same time, the Quality Assurance Committee also decided it would not proceed with a further assessment of Dr. Bhardwaj’s practice.
3The Executive Committee then requested an investigation into the doctor’s competence pursuant to s.75(b) of the Health Professions Procedural Code. The Registrar ordered an investigation into the doctor’s practice on May 17, 2004.
4The doctor seeks to prevent the investigation and to force the Quality Assurance Committee to continue an assessment.
5I find no serious issue to be tried. Nothing has happened other than an order to investigate. No decision has been made that would support a request for judicial review. The earlier application by Dr. Bhardwaj is moot because the Quality Assurance Committee abandoned any consideration of whether to impose restrictions on his practice.
6No irreparable harm can be caused by the investigation. The doctor will not lose his livelihood as a result of the investigation. The results will be considered by the Executive Committee, which will decide to either refer the doctor to the Quality Assurance Committee, or to the Discipline Committee, or to take no action. Before the Discipline Committee, there is a right to a full hearing including a right of appeal.
7I find the balance of convenience favours the College. The protection of the public is paramount. If Dr. Bhardwaj is incompetent (which has not been established), there is a serious risk of harm to his patients. It is the College’s statutory duty to ensure this does not happen.
8The application could not be more premature.
9The application for judicial review is dismissed on both issues. Costs to the responding party on a partial indemnity basis fixed at $2,000.00, inclusive of disbursements plus GST, payable in 30 days.
CARNWATH J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: November 8, 2004
Date of Release: November 10, 2004
COURT FILE NO.: 291/03
DATE: 20041108
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
B E T W E E N:
DR. KUNJ BHARDWAJ Applicant
- and -
COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS OF ONTARIO Respondent
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
CARNWATH J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: November 8, 2004
Date of Release: November 10, 2004