Wudassie Tamrat

The College of Physiotherapists of Ontario alleged that the registrant committed professional misconduct by referring patients to a Pilates studio and allowing the studio to bill those services as physiotherapy under her name and registration number.

The registrant admitted to the allegations via an agreed statement of facts.

The Discipline Tribunal found that the registrant failed to maintain the standards of practice, submitted false or misleading accounts, and engaged in disgraceful, dishonourable, or unprofessional conduct.

The Tribunal accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a 15-month suspension (with 7 months remitted upon completion of remediation), practice enhancement coaching, a reprimand, and $7,000 in costs.

The plaintiffs, representing Ottawa taxi plate holders and brokers, brought a class action against the City of Ottawa for its response to Uber's entry into the local market in 2014.

The court found that the City owed a duty of care to the taxi industry based on a long-standing, collaborative relationship and was negligent in failing to enforce its 2012 taxi by-law against Uber.

However, the court dismissed the plaintiffs' claims that the City's actions violated section 15 of the Charter or the Human Rights Code, finding no disproportionate discriminatory impact based on race or immigrant status.

The court also dismissed the claim that the City's taxi licensing fees constituted an unlawful tax, finding a reasonable nexus between the fees and the cost of services provided.

The appellants (Crown) appealed a Divisional Court order that declared the Math Proficiency Test (MPT) unconstitutional for infringing s. 15(1) of the Charter due to disproportionate adverse impact on racialized teacher candidates, and found it not justified under s. 1.

The Court of Appeal found that the Divisional Court erred by relying on incomplete and preliminary data (July 2021 Data) to conclude a disproportionate adverse impact.

The Court of Appeal, reviewing more complete data (December 2021 Data), determined that the MPT did not have a disproportionate adverse impact on racialized candidates' entry to the teaching profession, nor did it reinforce existing disadvantages.

The appeal was allowed, and the Divisional Court's order, including the declaration that s. 18(1)(c) of the OCTA was unconstitutional, was set aside.

This case conference endorsement addresses the conduct of a self-represented defendant in a defamation action, who held conspiracy theories about the court and plaintiff's counsel, and engaged in an abusive email campaign.

The court clarified the principle of judicial independence and distinguished between court filing systems (Civil Submissions Online portal) and electronic hearing platforms (Caselines).

The judge directed that plaintiff's counsel had no continuing obligation to upload the defendant's material to Caselines, particularly irrelevant emails, and warned the defendant against further malicious actions, emphasizing the importance of receiving court communications.