Paul Le Vay

The Ontario Securities Commission approved a settlement agreement with the respondent.

The respondent acknowledged engaging in insider trading contrary to s. 76(1) of the Securities Act, failing to file required insider reports under s. 107, and failing to correct a Management Information Circular that incorrectly stated his share ownership.

The Commission found the sanctions, which included a reprimand, fairly reflected the gravity of the conduct and approved the settlement as being in the public interest.

The member, a secondary school teacher, pleaded guilty to professional misconduct for acting inappropriately and unprofessionally with students, including discussing and showing his nipple ring, roughhousing, poking and tickling students, and using inappropriate language.

The Discipline Committee accepted the joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, publication of the decision, and the successful completion of a course on maintaining appropriate boundaries with students.

The member, a teacher, pleaded guilty to professional misconduct for inappropriately touching a student's buttocks.

The member had previously pleaded guilty to common assault in criminal court and received a conditional discharge.

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

The member was ordered to be reprimanded, with the reprimand recorded on the register for one year, and a summary of the decision published.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a discipline proceeding against a member for professional misconduct.

The member admitted to poking a student on the buttock and had previously pled guilty to common assault under the Criminal Code.

The Discipline Committee accepted the member's guilty plea and found him guilty of professional misconduct for failing to maintain the standards of the profession, abusing a student, and engaging in conduct unbecoming a member.

The Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand and publication of a summary of the decision including the member's name.

At a discipline hearing, the Ontario College of Teachers sought leave to withdraw the allegations set out in the Notice of Hearing against the member, as the College was unable to call any evidence in support of the allegations.

The member consented to the withdrawal.

The Discipline Panel granted the application and ordered the Notice of Hearing withdrawn.

The member pleaded guilty to professional misconduct for committing boundary infringements with two female students under 14 years of age.

The Discipline Committee accepted the joint submission on penalty, noting the member's cooperation, acceptance of responsibility, and successful completion of a course on maintaining appropriate boundaries.

The Committee ordered a reprimand to be recorded on the register for three years and publication of the decision.

The member, a teacher, pleaded guilty to professional misconduct for committing boundary infringements with two female students under 14 years of age.

The Discipline Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, finding the member guilty and ordering a reprimand to be recorded on the register for three years, along with publication of the decision.

The member had already completed a course on maintaining appropriate boundaries.

The member, a secondary school teacher, pleaded no contest to allegations of professional misconduct arising from voluntary question-and-answer sessions on sexual matters with student team members in hotel rooms during athletic road trips.

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

The member was ordered to be reprimanded and conditions were imposed on his certificate of qualification, including the completion of a course on appropriate teacher-student boundaries.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought disciplinary proceedings against a member for professional misconduct and incompetence, alleging a pattern of abusive, harassing, and threatening conduct towards female teachers and students between 1992 and 1998.

The member pleaded no contest to the allegations and agreed to a joint submission on penalty.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct and ordered a six-month suspension, to be postponed and not imposed if the member completes mandatory counselling and has no further reports of misconduct for one year.

The appellants appealed a trial judgment finding them liable for fraud, awarding damages and punitive damages, and granting an oppression remedy.

The appellants operated a petroleum supply business that became insolvent.

They continued to order gasoline from the respondent without intending to pay, using the proceeds to pay themselves and their lawyers.

The Court of Appeal upheld the finding of fraud and the compensatory damages of $539,658.41 for gasoline delivered after January 9, 1997.

However, the Court struck the oppression declaration, the $300,000 punitive damages award, and the order subordinating the appellants' secured claims, allowing the appeal in part.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought discipline proceedings against a member for professional misconduct involving the sexual abuse of a student.

The Discipline Committee relied on findings from a related criminal proceeding, which established that the member engaged in sexual activity with the student, including fellatio, at the member's home.

The Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct and ordered the immediate revocation of his Certificate of Qualification and Registration.

In a securities-related class proceeding arising from alleged fraudulent statements about Indonesian gold reserves, the appellants challenged the refusal to certify negligent misrepresentation while conspiracy, fraudulent misrepresentation, and Competition Act claims had been certified.

The court held that there was no principled basis to distinguish fraudulent from negligent misrepresentation at the certification stage, given the overlap in common factual and legal issues and the low threshold for common issues under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992.

The court further held that, where three related claims were already proceeding as a class action, it was sensible and efficient to include negligent misrepresentation on the same litigation track.

The appeal was allowed and the certification order amended accordingly.