ONTARIO MASSAGE THERAPISTS DISCIPLINE TRIBUNAL
Tribunal File No.: PC-10680
BETWEEN:
College of Massage Therapists of Ontario
College
- and -
Kurian Mathew
Registrant
FINDING AND PENALTY REASONS
Heard: October 2, 2025, by videoconference
Panel:
Jennifer Scott (panel chair)
Bobbie Flint (massage therapist)
Brian Highgate (public)
Jay Mathers (public)
Jennifer McGill (massage therapist)
Appearances:
Yufei (Fiona) Wang and Samil Chagpar, for the College
Kurian Mathew, self-represented
RESTRICTION ON PUBLICATION
Pursuant to Rule 2.2.2 of the HPDT Rules of Procedure and ss. 45-47 of the Health Professions Procedural Code, no one shall publish or broadcast the names of clients or any information that could identify clients or disclose clients’ personal health information or health records referred to at a hearing or in any documents filed with the Tribunal. There may be significant fines for breaching this restriction.
Pursuant to an order of the Ontario Court of Justice under subsection 486.5(1) or (2) of the Criminal Code, no one shall publish or broadcast any information that could identify the victim, witness or justice participant in the criminal proceeding.
The Ontario Massage Therapists Discipline Tribunal is the Discipline Committee established under the Health Professions Procedural Code.
Introduction
1Mr. Mathew was found guilty of sexually assaulting his employee, who was also his client (Client). He admits this is an offence relevant to his suitability to practise and that it constitutes sexual and physical abuse of the Client. He admits further that he contravened published standards of the College and failed to comply with his obligation to be honest with the College and inform it of his criminal charge and conviction in a timely way. He admits his conduct is disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional.
2Revocation of his certificate of registration and a reprimand are mandatory penalties given the nature of Mr. Mathew’s sexual abuse and his criminal conviction for sexual assault. In addition, we ordered that he reimburse the College for funding provided to the Client for therapy and counselling, post security for that funding, and pay costs at the tariff rate.
Admitted Facts
3Mr. Mathew hired the Client to work at his wellness clinic in August 2019. On the day that she was hired, Mr. Mathew provided massage therapy treatment to her arm, which was swollen. He continued to treat her arm over the next few days. Ten days after she was hired, Mr. Mathew provided massage therapy treatment to the Client. During the treatment, he slipped her pants down despite her telling him “no,” exposed her buttocks, massaged her glutes and buttocks despite her telling him that she did not want her glutes massaged, put his finger in the Client’s vagina despite her telling him “no,” and told the Client these massages were “seductive.”
4One week later, Mr. Mathew was charged with sexual assault. He was found guilty of sexual assault for digitally penetrating the Client without her consent, after he massaged her. He was sentenced to four months of incarceration, followed by 18 months’ probation. Mr. Mathew’s appeal of his conviction was dismissed.
5Mr. Mathew did not notify the College of the criminal charge and bail conditions and delayed informing the College of his conviction. Sections 85.6.4 and 85.6.1 of the Health Professions Procedural Code, Schedule 2 to the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, SO 1991, c. 18 (Code) require registrants to report this information to the College “as soon as reasonably practicable.” For four years, Mr. Mathew falsely answered questions on the College’s renewal forms regarding the criminal charge and conditions relating to his custody or release.
Power of the Tribunal to Hear This Case
6Mr. Mathew resigned from the College in January 2023 after his criminal conviction for sexual assault. Under s. 14(1) of the Code, the College continues to have jurisdiction over Mr. Mathew for actions he took from 2019 to 2022, while he was registered with the College.
Findings of Misconduct
7Mr. Mathew took advantage of the Client’s vulnerability. She was young, relatively new to the country and her immediate family was not in Canada. As a new employee, she was inherently vulnerable and even more so in these circumstances.
8The criminal court found Mr. Mathew guilty of sexual assault. A finding of sexual assault of an employee, who is also a client, is relevant to a registered massage therapist’s suitability to practise. It is obvious that a registrant who commits sexual assault of a client is not suitable to practise. We therefore make a finding under clause 51(1)(a) of the Code.
9Under s. 1(3) of the Code, sexual abuse includes touching and behaviour or remarks of a sexual nature. Mr. Mathew engaged in touching and behaviour of a sexual nature when he pulled the Client’s pants down exposing her buttocks and massaged her buttocks without her consent, put his finger in her vagina, and told her these massages are “seductive.” There was nothing seductive about this conduct. It is sexual abuse. We therefore make a finding under clause 51(1)(b.1) of the Code.
10Mr. Mathew’s sexual touching violated the physical integrity of the Client and constitutes physical abuse. His sexual comment to the Client regarding the seductive nature of his massages constitutes verbal abuse. Both are professional misconduct under s. 26, para. 8 of O. Reg. 544/94 under the Massage Therapy Act, 1991, SO 1991, c. 27 (Regulation[1]).
11Mr. Mathew contravened the College’s published standards. He contravened the Maintaining Professional Boundaries and Preventing Sexual Abuse Standard when he sexually abused the Client. He contravened the Communication/Public Health Standard 7: Consent when he did not obtain the Client’s consent to massage her sensitive areas and when he continued to massage these areas despite her protests: Regulation, s. 26, para. 6.
12Mr. Mathew engaged in further misconduct when he failed to notify the College of his criminal charges, when he lied to the College on his annual renewal forms between September 2019 and December 2022, and when he did not inform the College of his criminal conviction in a timely way: Regulation, s. 26, paras. 22, 29 and 41.
13Engaging in sexual abuse, failing to follow the College’s standards and lying to the College would also be reasonably regarded as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional conduct: Regulation, s. 26, para. 44.
Revocation and Reprimand
14Revocation and a reprimand are mandatory penalties because this sexual abuse included touching of a sexual nature of the Client’s genitals and Mr. Mathew was convicted of sexual assault: s. 51(5) and s. 51(5.2) of the Code. There is no need to consider penalty principles given the mandatory nature of this penalty.
Reimbursement of Funding for Therapy and Counselling
15The College seeks reimbursement of funding for therapy or counselling for the Client and that Mr. Mathew post security for amounts that might be paid. Money paid as security, if not used, will be returned to Mr. Mathew when the Client’s eligibility for funding ends on June 28, 2028.
16This Tribunal has held there is a presumption that clients sexually abused by a registered massage therapist may need counselling or therapy. The harm of sexual abuse is well documented and the importance of counselling or therapy in ameliorating that harm is an accepted fact. The presumption can be rebutted with specific evidence the client will not use the therapy. There is no such evidence here: College of Massage Therapists of Ontario v. Arango, 2025 ONMTDT 23.
17The parties have agreed that Mr. Mathew will reimburse the College for counselling and therapy funding that has been or may be provided to the Client and will post security for such reimbursement. Our role is limited when the parties make a joint submission to the Tribunal. We must accept it unless to do so would bring the administration of the professional discipline system into disrepute: R. v. Anthony-Cook, 2016 SCC 43. The parties’ agreement on reimbursement and security is appropriate and does not bring the administration of justice into disrepute. It is accepted for this reason.
Costs
18The parties agreed on costs at the half-day tariff rate of $5,852 and to a reasonable payment plan.
Order
19We made the following order:
Penalty
The Tribunal requires the registrant to appear before the panel immediately following the hearing in this matter to be reprimanded, with the fact of the reprimand and the text of the reprimand to appear on the public register of the College.
The Tribunal directs the Registrar to revoke the registrant’s certificate of registration effective immediately.
Costs
- The Tribunal requires the registrant to pay the College costs in the amount of $5,852, which can be paid in 23 monthly installments of $243 and a final payment of $263, with the first payment beginning one month from the date of the Tribunal’s order.
Reimbursement for Therapy and Counselling
The Tribunal requires the registrant to reimburse the College for funding that has been and that may in the future be provided to the Person under the program established under section 85.7 of the Code, up to $17,370 which is the maximum amount allowable for the Person (Client).
The Tribunal requires the registrant to post security acceptable to the College in the amount of $2,500 to guarantee the payment of any amounts he may be required to reimburse the College under paragraph 4, which can be paid in 23 monthly installments of $105 and a final payment of $85, with the first payment beginning one month from the date of the Tribunal’s order.
Any amount of security provided by the registrant pursuant to paragraph 5 that has not been used by June 28, 2028, will be returned to the registrant.
1The Tribunal is relying on the version of the Regulation in effect at the time of the misconduct.