by Brendan Farrer March 27, 2018 2 min read

In advance of a recent discipline hearing before The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, College counsel served a patient, Patient “A”, with a summons to appear to give evidence before the Discipline Committee.

What Happened?

The hearing was related to a Registrar’s investigation following a mandatory report regarding alleged sexual abuse between a physician and a patient. The patient had not wanted to disclose her name to College. After Patient “A” was served with the summons to appear before the Discipline Committee, she hired a lawyer to try to quash the summons, presumably because she did not want to testify before the College’s Discipline Committee. The Discipline Committee refused to quash the summons and Patient “A” was required to testify at the hearing, which she did. If she had failed to attend, the College’s lawyer had previously indicated that she would have the Court to enforce the summons, meaning that a judge could have ordered that the police arrest and bring Patient “A” to the hearing. The Discipline Committee’s reasons are not yet available, but were reported in the Toronto Star.

Broader Implications

According to the Toronto Star, the Discipline Committee stated it “is concerned that depriving the college of its ability to fully investigate and prosecute serious sex abuse allegations, based on a mandatory report from a physician, would risk rendering the mandatory reporting requirement by health care professionals toothless in eradicating sexual abuse by physicians”. This decision may have implications for other regulatory bodies where patients are unwilling to testify, but the College wants to proceed with the investigation in the public interest. Valerie Wise will be presenting on the topic of reluctant complainants at College proceedings at the upcoming Medico-Legal Society of Toronto's Spring Bouquet event taking place on April 11, 2018. Further information about the event can be found here. At Wise Health Law, we help regulated health professionals who are facing a complaint, investigation, or disciplinary hearing at their respective Colleges. We help clients understand their options, outline potential risks, guide them through the process, and represent them at proceedings. If you have questions about how we can help you, contact us online, or at 416-915-4234for a consultation.


Also in Blog

Cases to Watch: Marchi v. Nelson

by Mina Karabit September 22, 2020 3 min read

In August 2020, the Supreme Court heard and granted leave to appeal in Marchi v. Nelson, a case from the British Columbia Court of Appeal. The decision is one to watch as it will likely result in a renewed discussion of the distinction of policy versus operational decisions and their impacts on liability in tort law. The discussion will likely impact many of the anticipated post-COVID-19 lawsuits against public and government institutions.
Judicial Review: New Time Limits and a Helpful Primer

by Mina Karabit September 17, 2020 4 min read

In December 2019, Ontario’s Attorney General introduced Bill 161, the Smarter and Stronger Justice Act (the “Act”), which became law on July 8, 2020. The Act hopes to simplify a complex and outdated justice system by bringing changes to how legal aid services are delivered, how class actions are handled, and how court processes are administered.

Of note, the Act has amended the Judicial Review Procedures Act (JRPA) to establish new rules as to when an application for judicial review may be brought.

Any decisions made on or after July 8, 2020 are now subject to a 30-day limit for bringing an application for judicial review unless another Act provides otherwise. Courts, however, retain powers to extend the time for making an application for judicial review if satisfied that there are apparent grounds for relief and that no prejudice or hardship will be incurred by the delay. Before these amendments, the JRPA did not set out any time limits for bringing an application, but courts had powers to extend the time to bring an application if another Act prescribed the limit.

Recent Exemptions for Psychedelic Therapy in Canada

by Mina Karabit August 14, 2020 3 min read

In early August 2020, the Federal Minister of Health granted an exemption under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA) to four terminally ill Canadians to use psilocybin in their end of life care.

Psilocybin is one of the active ingredients/chemicals in “magic mushrooms,” the other is psilocin. Both psilocybin and psilocin are controlled substances under Schedule III of the CDSA. The sale, possession, production, etc. are prohibited unless authorized for clinical trial or research purposes under Part J of the Food and Drug Regulations. Both have been illegal in Canada since 1974. According to Health Canada, there are no approved therapeutic products containing psilocybin in Canada. However, the purified active ingredient, i.e. psilocybin, is being studied in supervised clinical settings for its potential to treat various conditions such as anxiety and depression.