Paul Le Vay

Following a merits decision finding that Coventree Inc. and its senior officers, Geoffrey Cornish and Dean Tai, failed to disclose material changes in breach of the Securities Act, the Ontario Securities Commission held a hearing to determine sanctions and costs.

The Commission emphasized the fundamental importance of timely disclosure to the integrity of capital markets.

While noting mitigating factors such as the respondents' lack of intent to mislead and their cooperation with Staff, the Commission imposed significant administrative penalties to achieve specific and general deterrence.

Coventree was ordered to pay a $1 million penalty and $250,000 in costs, while Cornish and Tai were each ordered to pay a $500,000 penalty and were prohibited from acting as directors or officers of a reporting issuer for one year.

CI Financial Corp. applied for a hearing and review of decisions by the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) requiring CI to submit a resolution ratifying the continuation of its Shareholder Rights Plan to a two-tiered vote of all shareholders and independent shareholders.

CI argued the TSX lacked jurisdiction to impose conditions on the mid-term vote.

The Ontario Securities Commission found that the mid-term ratification was not a 'transaction' involving the issuance or potential issuance of securities under the TSX Manual.

Therefore, the TSX lacked jurisdiction to impose conditions on the vote.

The TSX decisions were set aside, allowing only independent shareholders to vote on the plan's continuation.

The applicant sought judicial review of an interlocutory decision by the Law Society Hearing Panel dismissing her motion for a permanent stay of disciplinary proceedings.

She alleged procedural fairness violations because the panel considered public documents not entered in evidence, and raised language rights issues regarding the delayed translation of the reasons.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application as premature, finding no exceptional circumstances to justify fragmenting the administrative process.

The court held that both the procedural fairness and language rights issues should be raised before the Law Society Appeal Panel after a final decision.

The applicant sought judicial review of an interlocutory decision by the Law Society Hearing Panel refusing to permanently stay disciplinary proceedings against her.

She alleged breaches of procedural fairness and language rights, noting the Panel released its reasons in English and provided a French translation six weeks later despite the hearing being in French.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application as premature, finding no exceptional circumstances to justify fragmenting the administrative process.

The Court held that the applicant could raise both the procedural fairness and language rights issues before the Law Society Appeal Panel at the conclusion of the proceedings.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a motion seeking leave to withdraw allegations of professional misconduct against the member due to insufficiency of evidence.

The member did not attend the hearing.

The Discipline Committee authorized the withdrawal on consent, in exchange for the member's undertaking to complete a pre-approved course on classroom management and ethnocultural sensitization before accepting any teaching position requiring a Certificate of Qualification and Registration.

The Committee found this resolution reasonable and in the public interest.

The Discipline Committee held a penalty hearing after finding the Member guilty of professional misconduct for physically, verbally, psychologically, or emotionally abusing four students.

The College sought a six-month suspension, reprimand, psychiatric report, publication, and travel costs.

The Member argued for a lesser penalty, citing a psychiatric report indicating minimal risk of re-offending.

The Committee ordered a six-month suspension, a reprimand, ethics training, and publication of the Member's name with a summary of the decision.

The Committee declined to order the Member to pay travel costs or submit a further psychiatric report.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought disciplinary proceedings against a former member whose certificate had expired.

The member was alleged to have engaged in professional misconduct and incompetence, including verbal abuse of students, practising while under the influence of a substance, and abandoning his teaching position.

The Discipline Committee proceeded in the member's absence and found him guilty of professional misconduct and incompetence.

As the member's certificate had already expired, the Committee could not revoke or suspend it, but provided guidance to the Registrar regarding medical monitoring and performance appraisals should the member apply for reinstatement.

The Member, an occasional teacher, pleaded guilty to professional misconduct after confronting a student who had directed offensive slurs at him.

The Member took the student to the principal's office and yelled at him in a raised voice, causing the student to tremble and cry, without seeking administrative assistance.

The Discipline Committee accepted the guilty plea and found that the Member failed to maintain the standards of the profession by losing control of his professional demeanor.

The Committee ordered the Member to complete a course in student discipline techniques and directed publication of the decision without the Member's name, rejecting the joint submission's proposal for a reprimand and named publication.

The Member pleaded no contest to allegations of professional misconduct for making inappropriate and unprofessional comments in the presence of a female student teacher.

The Discipline Committee accepted the plea and found the Member guilty of professional misconduct.

The Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, completion of a course on appropriate boundaries, and publication of the decision in summary form without the Member's name.

The Member, a teacher, pleaded guilty to professional misconduct for providing her own prescription medication (Ritalin) to a student on two occasions without verifying parental consent or ensuring the student's dosage requirements had not changed.

The Discipline Committee accepted the agreed statement of facts and joint submission on penalty, finding the Member guilty of professional misconduct.

The Committee ordered that the Member be admonished, complete a counseling session on ethics concerning students' medication, and that a summary of the decision be published without her name.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought disciplinary proceedings against a teacher for allegedly using inappropriate physical force and restraint on several students in a special education class.

The teacher argued that the students were aggressive and that he used approved restraint techniques to ensure safety.

The Discipline Committee heard expert testimony on the appropriate use of physical restraint, establishing that it must only be used as a last resort when there is an imminent risk of injury.

The Committee found that in multiple incidents, the teacher used physical force and restraint when there was no imminent danger and without attempting other intervention methods.

The Committee concluded that the teacher's actions constituted professional misconduct, including abusing students, failing to maintain professional standards, and engaging in disgraceful and unprofessional conduct.

The member pleaded guilty to professional misconduct for making inappropriate comments and engaging in boundary violations with female students.

The conduct included sending an e-mail stating certain students received privileges because they were pretty, writing a limerick about a student, and making inappropriate jokes.

The Discipline Committee accepted the guilty plea and the joint submission on penalty.

The member was reprimanded, ordered to complete a course on respecting boundaries, and a summary of the decision was ordered to be published.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a motion seeking leave to withdraw the allegations of professional misconduct and incompetence set out in a Notice of Hearing against the member.

Upon the consent of the parties, the Discipline Committee authorized the withdrawal, concluding that it was reasonable and served the public interest.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought disciplinary proceedings against a member who repeatedly fell asleep during physical education classes, leaving students unsupervised, and attended a meeting with a principal and parent smelling of alcohol.

The member pled guilty to professional misconduct, including failing to maintain professional standards, failing to supervise adequately, and engaging in conduct unbecoming a member.

The Discipline Committee accepted the guilty plea and the joint submission on penalty.

The member was ordered to receive a verbal reprimand, complete mandatory coursework on school supervision and instructional management, and face a conditional three-month suspension if the coursework was not completed.

The Committee ordered publication of the decision without the member's name.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought allegations of professional misconduct against the respondent member for inappropriate physical contact with students, including kicking a student's backpack, kicking a desk leg, and slamming his hands on a desk.

The member pleaded guilty to failing to maintain the standards of the profession and engaging in conduct unbecoming a member.

The Discipline Committee accepted the agreed statement of facts and joint submission on penalty, finding the member guilty of professional misconduct.

The Committee ordered a verbal reprimand, completion of a course on respecting boundaries, and publication of the decision.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a motion seeking leave to withdraw the allegations of professional misconduct against the member set out in the Notice of Hearing.

Upon the consent of the parties, the Discipline Committee authorized the College to withdraw the allegations.

The Member, a teacher and former member of the College's Discipline Committee, was charged with professional misconduct for disclosing confidential information from a closed reinstatement hearing to the media and other parties.

The Member argued he was speaking generally about the reinstatement process and did not disclose specific confidential details.

The Discipline Committee found the Member's testimony lacked credibility and concluded, based on circumstantial evidence including emails and a television broadcast, that he had breached confidentiality.

The Member was found guilty of professional misconduct.

The appellant, a former foreign exchange trader, appealed a trial judgment finding him liable for fraud and breach of contract, and dismissing his counterclaim for wrongful dismissal.

The appellant had executed multiple unauthorized foreign exchange trades resulting in approximately $5.4 million in losses, which he concealed using fictitious credits.

On appeal, he argued the trial judge's reasons were inadequate, applied the wrong standard of proof for fraud, and erred in finding the employer could rely on his misrepresentations.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the trial judge's reasons sufficient, the correct standard of proof applied, and that the employer's alleged carelessness was not a defence to fraud.

The respondents brought a motion for an order requiring Staff of the Ontario Securities Commission to make meaningful disclosure of documents relevant to the specific allegations against them.

Staff had provided a database containing over 4.3 million pages of documents obtained during a four-year investigation, without separating relevant from irrelevant material.

The Commission held that Staff had not satisfied its legal obligation to make meaningful disclosure simply by delivering the massive database.

Staff was ordered to apply reasonable judgment to identify and disclose the documents relevant to the specific allegations against each respondent, rather than foisting the obligation to sift through the material onto the respondents.

The Member pleaded guilty to professional misconduct for grasping a student by the arm, lifting him from his chair, and taking him to the corner of the classroom.

The Discipline Committee accepted the Memorandum of Agreement and found the Member guilty of failing to maintain the standards of the profession and engaging in conduct unbecoming a member.

The Committee ordered a written reprimand and a notation on the public Register, but declined to order publication in the College's official magazine, noting the incident was isolated and did not involve physical assault.