CITATION: Conroy v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, 2011 ONCA 517

DATE: 20110712

DOCKET: C53265

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

Doherty, Laskin and Simmons JJ.A.

BETWEEN:

David William Conroy

Plaintiff (Appellant)

and

The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario

Defendant (Respondent)

David William Conroy, acting in person

Michelle Gibbs, for the respondent

Heard: July 11, 2011

On appeal from the order of Justice C. Horkins of the Superior Court of Justice, dated January 14, 2011.

APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT

[1] We have the benefit of the motion judge’s detailed review of the pleadings, evidence and arguments. Without commenting on her Rule 20 analysis we agree with her analysis on Rule 21. Both actions were properly dismissed under Rule 21.

[2] With one possible exception, all steps taken by the college were done in accordance with and pursuant to its statutory mandate under the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991 (Act). The one exception, the referral to the Fitness to Practice Committee in August 2009, if not done in accordance with the Act, was a technical, unintentional and entirely inconsequential breach of the Act. The referral had no effect on the subsequent conduct of the college all of which was precipitated by the legitimate and well documented concerns about the appellant’s fitness to practise.

[3] The motion judge did not address the Charter claims separately. In our view, it follows from her analysis of the college’s conduct that the Charter claims would not succeed. The college’s conduct was consistent with its statutory mandate. There is nothing to support these claims. They were properly dismissed.

[4] The appeal is dismissed. Costs to the respondent in the amount of $4,500, inclusive of disbursements and applicable taxes.