William Markle

The member, a vice-principal, was found guilty of professional misconduct for engaging in an inappropriate personal relationship with a vulnerable student, which included spending time alone with the student overnight and encouraging drug and alcohol use.

The Discipline Committee ordered that the member receive a reprimand and that his teaching certificate be immediately revoked, finding that his conduct demonstrated a complete disregard for the student's safety and well-being.

The member was also ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to the College.

This is a sentencing decision for Jesse King-Norris, who was charged with assault causing bodily harm during a Junior C hockey game, resulting in the victim sustaining a broken jaw.

The Crown sought a conditional jail sentence, while the defence argued for an absolute or conditional discharge, citing mitigating factors and the commonality of fighting in hockey.

The court acknowledged the unique context of hockey violence and the defendant's good character and remorse but denied a discharge due to the severity and foreseeability of the injury and the public interest in deterring serious on-ice assaults.

A suspended sentence with probation and community service was imposed.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a discipline proceeding against a retired member who had been convicted of two counts of sexual assault against former students.

The member did not attend the hearing.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct based on his criminal convictions for sexually assaulting two male students in the 1980s while offering after-school assistance.

The Committee ordered the revocation of the member's Certificate of Qualification and Registration, finding that his egregious abuse of his position of trust and authority warranted the most severe penalty available.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a motion seeking leave to withdraw allegations of professional misconduct against the Member.

The parties agreed to the withdrawal in exchange for the Member's undertaking to resign immediately, never seek reinstatement, and never teach again in Ontario.

The Discipline Committee granted the motion, finding that the withdrawal in exchange for the undertaking was reasonable and served to protect the public interest.

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

The College advised that the key witness and his parents had not responded to repeated attempts to communicate, leaving no reasonable prospect of obtaining a finding of professional misconduct.

The Discipline Committee granted the motion, finding the withdrawal to be reasonable, appropriate, and in the public interest.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought disciplinary proceedings against a member for engaging in boundary violations with students, including taking them to a movie, driving them in her vehicle, and having lunch with them.

The member pleaded no contest to the allegations and admitted that her actions constituted professional misconduct.

The Discipline Committee accepted the joint submission on penalty, ordering the member to receive counselling and complete a course on boundary violations.

The Committee also ordered publication of the decision in summary form without the member's name, noting her unblemished 24-year career and early acceptance of responsibility as mitigating factors.

The applicant alleged that the respondents discriminated against her with respect to services because of her place of origin, contrary to the Human Rights Code.

She claimed that her foreign educational credentials from Germany were unfairly evaluated, resulting in a lower placement category (A2), and that the evaluation process adversely impacted individuals with foreign degrees.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing and found no evidence linking the respondents' actions to the applicant's place of origin.

The documentary evidence showed she was placed in the A2 category because her degree average was less than a B-, a standard applied equally to domestic degrees.

The application was dismissed as having no reasonable prospect of success.

The member, a teacher, pleaded guilty to professional misconduct for physically abusing four students under the age of 14, which included inappropriate touching and slapping.

The member had previously pleaded guilty to four counts of assault under the Criminal Code and received a suspended sentence with two years' probation.

The Discipline Committee accepted an agreed statement of facts and a joint submission on penalty.

The member was reprimanded, received a three-month retroactive suspension, was ordered to complete coursework on boundary issues, and the decision was ordered to be published with his name.

The appellant appealed a decision of the Discipline Committee finding her guilty of professional misconduct.

The appellant argued that the Committee improperly reversed the onus of proof and applied a different standard in scrutinizing the evidence.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the Committee correctly articulated the law respecting burden of proof and credibility, and reasonably concluded there was sufficient evidence to establish professional misconduct.

The Member was found guilty of professional misconduct for breaching teacher-student boundaries, making inappropriate comments, and engaging in inappropriate physical contact with students.

The Discipline Committee ordered a reprimand, a three-month suspension (to be suspended if the Member completes required coursework on boundaries and classroom management), and publication of the decision with the Member's name.

The accused, a vocal music teacher, was charged with sexual assault, sexual interference, and invitation to sexual touching involving a 10‑year‑old student at a school.

The complainant testified to multiple assaults occurring during after‑school detentions in the music room.

The trial judge applied the principles in R. v. W.(D.) and assessed both credibility and reliability of the evidence.

Although the complainant was found credible and clearly traumatized, objective evidence regarding class schedules, the physical layout and accessibility of the classroom, and inaccuracies in the complainant’s recollection raised significant reliability concerns.

These factors created a reasonable doubt as to whether the alleged assaults occurred as described.

The accused was charged with multiple offences, including assault, choking, and pointing a firearm, arising from an alleged domestic incident with his common-law spouse.

The complainant reported the incident over a year later, amidst a contentious custody dispute.

The trial judge found significant issues with the complainant's credibility, including inconsistencies in her testimony, a threatening email sent to the accused's brother, and the timing of her disclosure.

Finding the corroborative evidence insufficient to overcome these credibility concerns, the court acquitted the accused on all counts due to reasonable doubt.

The accused, an uncle by marriage and high school visual arts teacher, was charged with sexual assault and sexual exploitation of a 17-year-old niece who lived with him and his wife.

The Crown alleged that on February 15, 2010, the accused engaged in a pattern of grooming and sexual misconduct, including touching the complainant without consent in her bedroom.

The accused denied the allegations at trial but had made admissions to police.

The court found the complainant's evidence credible and reliable, rejected the accused's trial testimony as fabricated rationalizations, and accepted his police admissions as genuine confessions.

The court found the accused guilty of sexual exploitation and stayed the sexual assault charge at the Crown's request.

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

College counsel determined there was insufficient evidence to support the allegations and no reasonable prospect of obtaining a finding of professional misconduct.

The member's counsel consented.

The Discipline Committee granted the motion, finding the withdrawal reasonable, appropriate, and in the public interest.

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

College counsel determined there was no evidence to support the allegations and no prospect of a finding of professional misconduct.

The member's counsel consented.

The Discipline Committee granted the motion, finding the withdrawal reasonable, appropriate, and in the public interest.

The Member, an elementary school teacher, pleaded no contest to allegations of professional misconduct relating to boundary violations with two female students.

The Member developed a close friendship with the students and their families, gave them gifts, became overly protective, and made inappropriate personal comments.

The Discipline Committee found the Member guilty of unprofessional conduct and conduct unbecoming a Member.

The Committee ordered a reprimand to be recorded on the Register and publication of the findings in summary form without the Member's name, noting the misconduct was at the low end of the scale and the Member had already completed mandatory counselling and a boundary course.

The member, a teacher, pleaded no contest to professional misconduct after engaging in an inappropriate, sexually explicit electronic relationship with a student.

The member had previously pleaded guilty to a criminal charge of internet luring and received a conditional discharge.

The Discipline Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, a one-year suspension of the member's teaching certificate, and conditions requiring a boundary course and psychological assessment before returning to teaching.

The Committee also ordered publication of the decision with the member's name, rejecting the member's request for anonymity.

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

The member admitted to using profane and sexualized language, making derogatory comments, and slapping a student's thigh with a metre stick.

Based on an agreed statement of facts and a joint submission on penalty, the Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct for verbal abuse and boundary violations.

The Committee ordered a reprimand, a three-month suspension (reducible to one month upon completion of a boundary course), and publication of the decision without the member's name.

The Member, a school principal, pleaded no contest to allegations of professional misconduct involving inappropriate and unprofessional behaviour towards staff, including exposing her brassiere, making inappropriate comments in jest, and attempting to obtain confidential information.

The Discipline Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, finding the Member guilty of professional misconduct.

The Committee ordered a reprimand, completion of a course on inter-personal relationships, and publication of the decision without the Member's name, noting reservations about the leniency of the joint submission but ultimately accepting it.

The member, a teacher, pleaded guilty to professional misconduct allegations before the Discipline Committee of the Ontario College of Teachers.

The allegations stemmed from her criminal conviction for accepting a $30,000 secret commission while employed by a school board.

The Committee accepted the guilty plea, finding that the member's actions constituted disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional conduct.

The Committee ordered the revocation of the member's certificate of qualification and registration, emphasizing the need to protect the public interest and maintain the reputation of the teaching profession.