William W. Markle

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 appellant teacher appealed a penalty decision of the Ontario College of Teachers revoking her teaching certificate after she was found guilty of professional misconduct for an inappropriate relationship with a 14-year-old student.

The appellant argued the Committee erred in admitting expert evidence on 'grooming' at the penalty phase since she was acquitted of actual abuse.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the admission of expert evidence was proper and the penalty of revocation was reasonable and entitled to deference.