Shane C. D’Souza

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a discipline proceeding against a member who had been criminally convicted of sexual interference involving a student under the age of sixteen.

The member did not attend the hearing.

Relying on the criminal conviction and court documents, the Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct, including sexual abuse of a student.

The Committee ordered the immediate revocation of the member's certificate of qualification and registration, along with publication of the decision with the member's name.

The defendants brought a motion to compel the plaintiff to produce three categories of documents in its affidavit of documents.

The plaintiff argued that it was prohibited from producing these documents by United States regulatory and privacy laws, as well as US court protective orders.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that the foreign laws and orders were entitled to comity.

The court held that the plaintiff should not be compelled to violate foreign laws and directed the defendants to seek production or consent directly from the relevant US authorities or courts, with the plaintiff's reasonable cooperation.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a discipline proceeding against a shop teacher for multiple incidents of verbal, physical, and psychological abuse of students, as well as endangering student safety.

The Discipline Committee found the teacher guilty of professional misconduct, noting he used profane language, threw objects at students, pushed a student's head onto a table saw, and deliberately scratched a student's safety glasses before instructing him to weld.

The Committee ordered the revocation of the teacher's Certificate of Qualification and Registration and directed publication of the decision with his name.

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

The member consented to the withdrawal.

The Discipline Committee granted the motion, finding that there was no reasonable prospect of obtaining a finding of professional misconduct and that the withdrawal was reasonable and appropriate.

The plaintiff, Keatley Surveying Ltd., brought a class action against Teranet Inc., alleging copyright infringement for scanning, copying, and making available online plans of survey registered in Ontario's electronic land registry system.

Both parties moved for summary judgment on common issues, primarily concerning whether copyright in the plans belonged to the Province of Ontario under s. 12 of the Copyright Act upon registration or deposit.

The court held that while copyright subsisted in the plans, it belonged to the Province of Ontario pursuant to s. 12 of the Copyright Act, as a result of their registration or deposit in the land registry office, which transferred ownership of the property, including copyright, to the Crown.

Consequently, Teranet, acting under license from the province, did not infringe copyright.

The defendant's motion for summary judgment was granted, and the class action was dismissed.

The Member brought a motion seeking an adjournment of her discipline hearing on the day it was scheduled to commence, citing a need for closed captioning accommodation due to a hearing impairment.

The College consented to the adjournment to arrange the accommodation.

The Discipline Committee granted the adjournment, finding that the need for accommodation outweighed the inconvenience to the College and its witnesses, and that proceeding without accommodation would significantly prejudice the Member.

The defendant's motion for leave to appeal an order granting the plaintiffs leave to amend their statement of claim and requiring the defendant to answer discovery refusals was dismissed.

The plaintiffs sought costs of $7,672.26 on a partial indemnity basis for the written motion.

The court found the plaintiffs' docketed hours excessive and noted the reasonable expectations of the unsuccessful party.

Costs were fixed at $3,500 inclusive of disbursements and HST.

The defendant, W.O. Stinson & Son Limited, sought leave to appeal an interlocutory order that granted the plaintiffs leave to amend their Statement of Claim and required the defendant to answer questions refused at discovery.

The underlying action involved an oil leak from a tank installed by the defendant.

The court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal, finding no good reason to doubt the correctness of the motions judge's decision regarding the amendment of pleadings or the discovery refusals.

Furthermore, the court held that the proposed appeal did not raise matters of general importance, as the issues were specific to the facts and pleadings of the case.

The member was found guilty of professional misconduct for falsely reporting to school administrators that a colleague had physically and sexually abused a student.

The Discipline Committee found that the member had no reasonable grounds to suspect abuse and that her false allegations were extremely damaging to her colleague's career and personal life.

At the penalty hearing, the College sought revocation of the member's teaching certificate, while the member argued for a lesser penalty, citing her unblemished record and the potential chilling effect on the duty to report.

The Committee concluded that the aggravating factors, including the severity and repeated nature of the false allegations, significantly outweighed the mitigating factors.

The Committee ordered the immediate revocation of the member's Certificate of Qualification and Registration and directed that the decision be published with her name.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a discipline proceeding against a member for posting photographs of two grade [XXX] students on his personal social media without parental permission and for giving inappropriate gifts to students.

The member did not attend the hearing.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct, noting that his actions crossed professional boundaries and violated student privacy.

Given the member's prior discipline history for similar conduct, his failure to cooperate with the investigation, and the seriousness of the boundary violations, the Committee ordered the immediate revocation of his Certificate of Qualification and Registration.

The plaintiffs brought a motion seeking leave to amend their statement of claim and to compel answers to certain refused questions arising from examinations for discovery in an action alleging negligence and breach of contract relating to an oil tank leak at their residential property.

The proposed amendments included pleading that the defendant sold the oil tank and breached obligations under the Sale of Goods Act.

The court held that the amendments did not introduce a new cause of action but rather advanced alternative legal bases and particulars arising from the same factual matrix already pleaded.

Accordingly, the amendments were permitted despite limitation period arguments.

The court also ruled on several discovery refusals, ordering answers to questions relevant to the defendant’s knowledge of corrosion risks and similar tank issues, subject to proportionality considerations.

The self‑represented plaintiff sought damages against a bank after a cheque issued jointly to the plaintiff and a contractor’s corporation was deposited into the corporation’s account.

The plaintiff alleged the bank had wrongfully negotiated the cheque contrary to advice that both payees must attend in person.

The court found no evidence that the bank made such a representation and held that under the Bills of Exchange Act a cheque payable to joint payees may be negotiated where it bears the endorsement of the absent payee and the funds are deposited to the present payee’s account.

The evidence showed the plaintiff voluntarily endorsed the cheque and delivered it to the contractor as part of an arrangement to obtain insurance proceeds.

The bank’s conduct was consistent with both the governing law and its policies, and any dispute regarding the funds was between the plaintiff and the contractor.

In a bifurcated class action certification motion, the court considered whether unit-holders of a publicly traded real estate investment trust had pleaded viable causes of action arising from an allegedly conflicted property transaction that was later rescinded, causing a sharp drop in unit value.

The court held it was plain and obvious that officers and trustees did not owe fiduciary duties directly to unit-holders in the circumstances pleaded, and struck the fiduciary duty claims.

However, the breach of trust claims against certain trustees, grounded in the declaration of trust and the arguable ability of unit-holders to sue for dishonest or negligent breach of trustee obligations, were allowed to proceed.

The knowing assistance claim survived only against the former CEO, while similar claims against the vendor parties and their solicitors were struck for failure to plead active assistance in the trustee's breach.

Certification was dismissed as against the vendor parties and their solicitors.

The plaintiff, a unit-holder in a real estate investment trust (REIT), brought a proposed class action alleging that the REIT's former CEO and trustees breached their fiduciary duties and duties of trust by entering into an undisclosed related-party transaction.

On a bifurcated certification motion to determine if the pleadings disclosed a reasonable cause of action under s. 5(1)(a) of the Class Proceedings Act, the court struck the breach of fiduciary duty claims, finding that the defendants owed duties to the REIT but not to the unit-holders.

However, the court allowed the breach of trust claims against the trustees and the knowing assistance claim against the former CEO to proceed, while striking the knowing assistance claims against the vendor and the vendor's solicitors.

The Discipline Committee held a penalty hearing for a teacher found guilty of professional misconduct for writing an inappropriate comment on a student's report card, threatening his principal, and acting unprofessionally towards a colleague.

The College sought a reprimand, a one-month suspension, coursework, and publication with name, while the member argued against a suspension and publication with name.

The Committee ordered a reprimand, a 15-day suspension, coursework on boundaries and communication, and publication of the decision with the member's name, finding that the member's lack of accountability and repeated misconduct warranted these measures.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought disciplinary proceedings against a member for allegedly making false reports about a colleague.

The member was accused of calling the colleague a liar in front of students and staff, falsely reporting that the colleague stepped on a special needs student's toes, and falsely reporting that the colleague inappropriately touched the student.

The Discipline Committee found that while the 'liar' incident occurred, it did not amount to professional misconduct.

However, the Committee concluded that the member falsely reported the physical and sexual abuse allegations without reasonable grounds.

The Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct for making groundless allegations that tarnished her colleague's reputation.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought allegations of professional misconduct against a teacher for writing an inappropriate comment on a student's report card, leaving a threatening note for the principal regarding the investigation, engaging in abusive behaviour towards a colleague over a shared office dispute, and failing to comply with a directive to move offices.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct for the report card comment, the threatening note, and the abusive behaviour towards his colleague, noting a pattern of unprofessional conduct and a lack of accountability.

The allegation regarding the failure to move offices was dismissed due to insufficient evidence.

A penalty hearing was to be scheduled.

The Discipline Committee held a penalty hearing after finding the Member guilty of professional misconduct and incompetence related to poor classroom management and failure to ensure student safety.

The College sought a reprimand, coursework, a one-month suspension, publication with name, and $15,000 in costs.

The Member agreed to the reprimand and coursework but opposed the suspension, publication with name, and costs.

The Committee ordered a reprimand, coursework, and publication with name to serve as specific and general deterrents.

The Committee declined to order a suspension, finding insufficient evidence to support it, and denied the College's request for costs, concluding that the Member's defence was not unreasonable or frivolous.

The Member, a teacher, faced a discipline hearing for professional misconduct related to his failure to adequately supervise students during an overnight school trip.

The Member was the sole teacher supervising 34 students at a conference and left the students unsupervised at the hotel for several hours late at night.

He also allowed students free access to his hotel room.

The Member pleaded guilty to the allegations.

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 reprimand, a 5-day suspension (already served), and the successful completion of a course on effective supervision and boundaries.

The Member, a teacher, faced allegations of professional misconduct and incompetence following three unsatisfactory performance appraisals, unauthorized absences, and inappropriate remarks to colleagues.

The Member pleaded guilty to the allegations and admitted to incompetence.

The Discipline Committee accepted the guilty plea, finding the Member guilty of professional misconduct and incompetence.

The Committee ordered a reprimand and publication of the decision with the Member's name, noting the Member had also signed an undertaking requiring medical clearance and additional coursework before returning to teaching.