CITATION: Chong v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, 2014 ONSC 6034
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 416/14
DATE: 20141016
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
BETWEEN:
DONALD CHONG
Applicant
(Responding Party)
– and –
COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS OF ONTARIO
Respondent
(Moving Party)
David B. Cousins, for the Applicant (Responding Party)
Vicki A. White and Bay Ryley, for the Respondent (Moving Party)
HEARD at Toronto: October 16, 2014
HARVISON YOUNG J. (orally)
[1] As I indicated in my endorsement of August 14, 2014 on the College’s motion for directions, s. 83.1(6) of the Act does not permit quality assurance information to be referred to, reiterated or alluded to in evidence before the Court. Accordingly, in my view, I should not be treating as evidence paragraphs 19, 20, 21 and 22 of Dr. Chong’s affidavit filed on the motion to stay.
[2] This does not prejudice Dr. Chong in any way because all of this is information which is contained in the record of proceedings and thus his counsel, Mr. Cousins, is free to refer to it in the course of his argument on the motion to stay.
HARVISON YOUNG J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: October 16, 2014
Date of Release: October 21, 2014
CITATION: Chong v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, 2014 ONSC 6034
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 416/14
DATE: 20141016
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
HARVISON YOUNG J.
BETWEEN:
DONALD CHONG
Applicant
(Responding Party)
– and –
COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS OF ONTARIO
Respondent
(Moving Party)
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
HARVISON YOUNG J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: October 16, 2014
Date of Release: October 21, 2014