Health Professions Review Board
|
|
- Dale Owen
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Health Professions Review Board Suite 900, 747 Fort Street Victoria British Columbia Telephone: Toll Free: (within BC) Facsimile: Mailing Address: PO 9429 STN PROV GOVT Victoria BC V8W 9V1 Website: DECISION NO HPA-166 (a) In the matter of an application under section 50.6 of the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 183, as amended, (the Act ) for review of a complaint disposition made by an Inquiry Committee BETWEEN: The Complainant COMPLAINANT AND: The College of Dental Surgeons of BC COLLEGE AND: A Certified Dental Assistant REGISTRANT BEFORE: Lorne R. Borgal, Panel Chair REVIEW BOARD DATE: Conducted by way of written submissions concluding on November 23, 2015 APPEARING: For the Complainant: Self-represented DECISION ON APPLICATION FOR REVIEW I STAGE 1 HEARING [1] This complaint has been referred to a Stage 1 hearing. At this stage the following results are possible: (a) I may confirm the Inquiry Committee disposition under s.50.6(8)(a) of the Act if the application for review can be fairly, properly and finally adjudicated on the merits without the need for submissions from the College and Registrant; or (b) I may determine that the application requires adjudication in a Stage 2 hearing, in which case no decision will be made until after requesting submissions from the College and Registrant, and further reply submissions from the Complainant. [2] Having reviewed the record of the Inquiry Committee s investigation (the Record ), the Complainant s Application for Review and her Statement of Points, I have
2 DECISION NO HPA-166 (a) Page 2 determined that I am able to adjudicate this application for review on the merits in accordance with para. [1](a). Therefore, I have concluded this hearing at Stage 1. II BACKGROUND AND FACTS [3] The Complainant attended at the office of a dental surgeon (the Dentist ) where the Registrant was employed. Subsequently, on November 6, 2014, the Complainant filed a complaint with the College against the Dentist ( First Complaint ). The First Complaint was not made against the Registrant who is the subject of this hearing. During the course of the investigation of the First Complaint the Registrant provided a document ( Registrant s Response ) to the Inquiry Committee as part of the Dentist s response to the First Complaint in which she described her recollection of the events related to the First Complaint. [4] Apart from the First Complaint, on June 26, 2015, the Complainant filed a second complaint with the College (the Complaint ) alleging that the Registrant s Response was not a factual account of what had occurred and that the Registrant appears prejudicial in her comments in favor of her employer (Dentist) The Complainant referenced the following sentence in the Registrant s Response, She (the Complainant) didn t want x-rays because she had some recently taken so we didn t take any that day. [5] The Inquiry Committee of the College received the Complaint, determined that The differences in the recollections are not so significant as to warrant intervention and assigned the Complaint to the Registrar on the basis that it would be immediately dismissed pursuant to s.32(3) of the Act. [6] The Review Board exists in part to provide, upon an application for review by a Complainant, impartial and objective reviews of complaint dispositions of Inquiry Committees of the health colleges of British Columbia. These are reviews of dispositions and not fresh examinations of complaints. In completing a review I examine the entire Record of the matter pertaining to the complaint. My mandate in this case is to determine whether the Inquiry Committee conducted an adequate investigation and if it did, then I am to determine whether the disposition of the matter was reasonable. [7] In the event that I find that the Inquiry Committee disposition was either not adequate or not reasonable then the Act provides me with the authority to direct the Inquiry Committee to make a disposition that it could have made or (more typically) to send the matter back to the Inquiry Committee with specific directions. III DISPOSITION LETTER [8] In the disposition letter the Inquiry Committee summarized the Complaint and described their reasons for dismissing it without further investigation. The Inquiry Committee noted that the Registrant s Response was that the Complainant did not want x-rays taken while the Complainant submitted that she did not refuse to have x-rays taken. The Inquiry Committee concluded that not wanting is not equivalent to
3 DECISION NO HPA-166 (a) Page 3 refusing and while there may be differing recollections of what occurred they could not conclude that the Registrant was willfully dishonest or inaccurate in her (Registrant s Submission). [9] In her application for review the Complainant alleged that the investigation was not adequate and/or not reasonable and asked that the Review Board send the matter back to the Inquiry Committee. IV COMPLAINANT S STATEMENT OF POINTS [10] In her Statement of Points ( SOP ), the Complainant made numerous claims all of which I have considered. She noted her concern regarding exposure to x-rays, her questions during the appointment with the Dentist about the receipt of x-rays taken by another dentist, the presence or not of various assistants during the appointment and her assertion that At no time did I state that I would not allow them to take another x- ray. [11] The Complainant clearly reflects in her SOP that she believes that the Registrant reported a false statement in the chart about (her) refusal of x-rays and that this led to numerous other issues which were negative to her. The SOP contains numerous other references to concerns the Complainant has which are not relevant to this decision as they refer to issues she has with the Dentist. V RELEVANT LEGISLATION, RULES AND POLICY [12] The disposition in this matter was made by the Registrar in accordance with the provisions of s.32(3) of the Act which in turn becomes a decision of the Inquiry Committee in accordance with s.32(5) of the Act. [13] Section 50.6(5) of the Act defines what the Review Board must consider: On receipt of an application under subsection (1), the review board must conduct a review of the disposition and must consider one or both of the following: (a) the adequacy of the investigation conducted respecting the complaint; (b) the reasonableness of the disposition. Section 50.6(6) of the Act stipulates that a review under this section is a review on the record. Section 50.6(8) of the Act stipulates that upon completion of its review under this section, the review board may make an order: (a) confirming the disposition of the inquiry committee, (b) directing the inquiry committee to make a disposition that could have been made by the inquiry committee in the matter, or
4 DECISION NO HPA-166 (a) Page 4 (c) sending the matter back to the inquiry committee for reconsideration with directions. VI APPLICABLE CASE LAW AND EVIDENCE [14] The Supreme Court of Canada ( SCC ) in Construction Labour Relations v. Driver Iron Inc., 2012 SCC 65 (CanLII) at para. [3] set out that it had strongly emphasized that administrative tribunals do not have to consider and comment upon every issue raised by the parties in their reasons. For reviewing courts, the issue remains whether the decision, viewed as a whole in the context of the record, is reasonable. [15] The Complainant s SOP contains many allegations that are tangential to the Registrant s Response as well as numerous references to her concerns regarding the Registrant. I have considered the Complainant s SOP in its entirety; however, I rely on the SCC decision in para. 20 above and will not comment upon every issue raised. [16] Prior to dealing with the adequacy and reasonableness of the disposition it is necessary to unbundle the Complainant s submissions. The Complaint was in regard to the Registrant s Response dated November 27, This is the subject of the disposition provided by the College on August 5, 2015 for which the Complainant filed an application for review. Therefore, the focus of this decision is properly the adequacy and reasonableness of the August 5, 2015 disposition. [17] In the Complaint there is reference to a chart entry dated October 21, 2014 which was allegedly made by the Registrant and is included as Appendix 4 of the Complaint. The context of this reference in the Complaint is with respect to concerns the Complainant has with the Dentist and not to the Registrant s Response. It is my decision that the Inquiry Committee properly focused on the Registrant s Response and was not required to respond to the chart entry reference in their disposition. [18] In the SOP filed in conjunction with her application for review, the Complainant provides little information in support of her concerns regarding the disposition of the Complaint. The SOP is focused almost exclusively on chart notes that were made or not made during the course of treatment by the Dentist in contrast to the Complainant s recollection of the events which are the subject of the chart notes. [19] I note in her SOP that the Complainant referenced a chart note and attached the same October 21, 2014 record referenced in para. [23]. In the SOP this chart note is referenced in the context of the Complainant s concerns regarding other communications and chart notes and not in the context of the Registrant s Response. [20] I am not to ascribe meaning where none is attributed or implied by the parties. For greater clarity, this decision has not considered the Complainant s submissions except as they relate to the application for review of the August 5, 2015 disposition.
5 DECISION NO HPA-166 (a) Page 5 VII ADEQUACY OF THE INVESTIGATION [21] The Review Board must, on review, determine the adequacy of the investigation. The investigation that was undertaken by the Inquiry Committee need not have been a perfect investigation but it must have been adequate. What is considered adequate will differ from case to case depending primarily on the seriousness of the issues raised in the complaint and the findings of the investigation. [22] What constitutes an adequate investigation in the context of the Review Board was well defined in Review Board Decision No HPA-0001(a) to 0004(a) paras. [97] and [98] which reasoning I have adopted herein: [97] A complainant is not entitled to a perfect investigation, but he or she is entitled to adequate investigation. Whether an investigation is adequate will depend on the facts. An investigation does not need to have been exhaustive in order to be adequate, provided that reasonable steps were taken to obtain the key information that would have affected the Inquiry Committee s assessment of the complaint. [98] The degree of diligence expected of the College what degree of investigation was adequate in the circumstances may well vary from complaint to complaint. Factors such as the nature of the complaint, the seriousness of the harm alleged, the complexity of the investigation, the availability of evidence and the resources available to the college will all be relevant factors in determining whether an investigation was adequate in the circumstances. [23] The test of adequacy will be met if I am satisfied that the Inquiry Committee took reasonable steps to obtain information relevant to their assessment of the Complaint. This test can be met without exhausting all possible avenues of pursuit in the quest for investigative information. [24] In this matter I find that, upon receipt of the Complaint, the Inquiry Committee: (a) Considered the precise wording in the Complaint in comparison to the wording used in the Registrant s Response; (b) Determined that they could make a decision on the disposition without further investigation; (c) Made a decision; and (d) Provided a disposition letter to the Complainant with a copy to the Registrant attached to a separate letter to the Registrant. [25] The Record demonstrates that the Inquiry Committee considered that the normal process of investigation would not be followed in this case based on their interpretation of the facts already before them. The disposition was based on the information in the Complaint and in the Registrant s Response. [26] It is unusual for an Inquiry Committee to not follow a process of investigation that includes receiving the medical records related to a complaint. The Registrar in a memo
6 DECISION NO HPA-166 (a) Page 6 to the Inquiry Committee dated June 30, 2015 wrote that the Complaint essentially involves differences in recollection of what was said and that the differences are not sufficient as to warrant further investigation. [27] The Complainant in her SOP, page 6 item 7, submits that the summary referenced in para. [32] prejudiced the Inquiry Committee and deprived the Committee of information that would have been uncovered by a more fulsome investigation. The Complainant challenged the investigation as if it was a normal practice which allowed fabrications to persist to her detriment. [28] I find no evidence that the summary referenced in para. [33] prejudiced the Inquiry Committee and the Complainant has provided no evidence in support of her allegation. [29] I have considered the entire Record and find that there is no information before me that would lead me to conclude that further investigation by the Inquiry Committee was warranted. I find that the Inquiry Committee conducted an investigation that was appropriate for the facts in this case and I have determined that the investigation was adequate. VIII REASONABLENESS OF THE DISPOSITION [30] The Review Board is provided by legislation with the jurisdiction to define and apply reasonableness within the context of the reforms of the Act which created the Review Board whose purpose it is to ensure an appropriate degree of accountability on the part of the Inquiry Committee. The Review Board is not to ignore what the Inquiry Committee has done. Rather the Review Board is to determine the degree of deference to the Inquiry Committee that is appropriate in particular circumstances and, as it is not a court, the test of reasonableness will necessarily reflect the Review Board s specialized role and expertise. [31] In my view, a functional definition of reasonable that accords with the current state of the law is whether the decision falls within a range of possible, acceptable outcomes which are defensible in respect of the facts and law. A reasonable disposition should be transparent in that it is clear as to how the Inquiry Committee arrived at its conclusion, intelligible in that it is clearly expressed and easy to understand and justified in that the reader should be able to understand the factual and legal foundation for the Inquiry Committee s conclusion. This is the standard against which I have assessed whether or not the Inquiry Committee s disposition was reasonable. [32] The issue in the Complaint that was before the Inquiry Committee was solely the allegation by the Complainant that the Registrant s Response was untruthful in asserting that the Complainant didn t want x-rays because she had some recently taken so we didn t take any that day. The Complainant submitted in her Complaint that the Registrant s Response meant that the Complainant had refused to have x-rays taken and she submitted that At no time did I state that I would not allow them to take another x-ray.
7 DECISION NO HPA-166 (a) Page 7 [33] Given the absence of investigation and the non-technical, summary nature of the disposition, I find that I must make an assessment of the alleged facts in order to form an opinion on the reasonableness of the disposition. Having reviewed the relevant facts as alleged, I find that the Registrant s Response does not have the meaning attributed to it by the Complainant. To write that someone didn t want x-rays, especially in the context of a particular day, does not translate to or mean that person has refused to have x-rays taken. There is no medical issue in this interpretation. The only issue is the interpretation of the words used in the Registrant s Response and I find that those words do not have the meaning ascribed to them by the Complainant. [34] From the basis of my own conclusion on the facts, I am able to determine that the Inquiry Committee disposition is consistent with the facts and law and meets the test of a reasonable disposition. IX CONCLUSION [35] In the course of this review I have considered all of the information before me whether I specifically referenced it herein or not. [36] For the reasons presented above, I find that the investigation of this complaint was adequate and the disposition was reasonable. Having made these determinations I therefore confirm the disposition of the Inquiry Committee. Lorne R. Borgal Lorne R. Borgal, Panel Chair Health Professions Review Board January 7, 2016
BETWEEN: The Complainant COMPLAINANT. AND: The College of Psychologists of British Columbia COLLEGE. AND: A Psychologists REGISTRANT
Health Professions Review Board Suite 900, 747 Fort Street, Victoria, BC V8W 3E9 Complainant v. The College of Psychologists of British Columbia DECISION NO. 2017-HPA-112(a) March 15, 2018 In the matter
More informationHealth Professions Review Board
Health Professions Review Board Suite 900, 747 Fort Street Victoria British Columbia Telephone: 250 953-4956 Toll Free: 1-888-953-4986 (within BC) Facsimile: 250 953-3195 Mailing Address: PO 9429 STN PROV
More informationHealth Professions Review Board
Health Professions Review Board Suite 900, 747 Fort Street Victoria British Columbia Telephone: 250 953-4956 Toll Free: 1-888-953-4986 (within BC) Facsimile: 250 953-3195 Mailing Address: PO 9429 STN PROV
More informationBritish Columbia. Health Professions Review Board. Rules of Practice and Procedure for Reviews under the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c.
British Columbia Health Professions Review Board Rules of Practice and Procedure for Reviews under the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 183 These rules for reviews to the Health Professions Review
More informationHealth Professions Review Board
Health Professions Review Board Suite 900, 747 Fort Street Victoria British Columbia Telephone: 250 953-4956 Toll Free: 1-888-953-4986 (within BC) Facsimile: 250 953-3195 Mailing Address: PO 9429 STN PROV
More informationComplainant v. The College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia
Health Professions Review Board Suite 900, 747 Fort Street, Victoria, BC V8W 3E9 Complainant v. The College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia DECISION NO. 2016-HPA-233(a); 2016-HPA-234(a)
More informationHealth Professions Review Board
Health Professions Review Board Suite 900, 747 Fort Street Victoria British Columbia Telephone: 250 953-4956 Toll Free: 1-888-953-4986 (within BC) Facsimile: 250 953-3195 Mailing Address: PO 9429 STN PROV
More informationComplainant v. The College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia
Health Professions Review Board Suite 900, 747 Fort Street, Victoria, BC V8W 3E9 Complainant v. The College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia DECISION NO. 2017-HPA-006(a) October 5, 2017 In
More informationBETWEEN: The Complainant COMPLAINANT. AND: A Physician REGISTRANT. BEFORE: Fazal Bhimji, Panel Chair REVIEW BOARD
Health Professions Review Board Suite 900, 747 Fort Street, Victoria, BC V8W 3E9 Complainant v. Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia DECISION NO. 2017-HPA-150(a) October 12, 2018 In the matter of
More informationBETWEEN: The Complainant COMPLAINANT. AND: A Dentist REGISTRANT. BEFORE: William R. Cottick, Panel Chair REVIEW BOARD
Health Professions Review Board Suite 900, 747 Fort Street, Victoria, BC V8W 3E9 Complainant v. College of Dental Surgeons of BC DECISION NO. 2018-HPA-047(a) August 15, 2018 In the matter of an application
More informationHealth Professions Review Board
Health Professions Review Board Suite 900, 747 Fort Street Victoria British Columbia Telephone: 250 953-4956 Toll Free: 1-888-953-4986 (within BC) Facsimile: 250 953-3195 Mailing Address: PO 9429 STN PROV
More informationComplainant v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia
Health Professions Review Board Suite 900, 747 Fort Street, Victoria, BC V8W 3E9 Complainant v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia DECISION NO. 2017-HPA-029(a) July 3, 2018 In the matter
More informationRULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE. May 14, 2015
RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE May 14, 2015 INDEX PART 1 INTRODUCTION... 1 PART 2 GENERAL RULES... 2 Rule 1 How the Rules are Applied... 2 Applying the Rules... 2 Conflict with the Act... 2 Rule 2 Consequences
More informationINVESTIGATION REPORT LOBBYIST: Peter Walters. December 17, 2015
INVESTIGATION REPORT 15-12 LOBBYIST: Peter Walters December 17, 2015 SUMMARY: A consultant lobbyist filed a return to register as a lobbyist on behalf of a client after the deadline required by the Lobbyists
More informationINTRODUCTION... 3 WHY DOES THE OIPC HOLD INQUIRIES?... 3 WHO PARTICIPATES IN AN INQUIRY?... 3 HOW LONG DOES AN INQUIRY TAKE?... 4
, 201 Page 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION... 3 WHY DOES THE OIPC HOLD INQUIRIES?... 3 WHO PARTICIPATES IN AN INQUIRY?... 3 HOW LONG DOES AN INQUIRY TAKE?... 4 HOW DO I PREPARE FOR A WRITTEN INQUIRY?...
More informationOrder F14-44 WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL. Elizabeth Barker, Adjudicator. October 3, 2014
Order F14-44 WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL Elizabeth Barker, Adjudicator October 3, 2014 Quicklaw Cite: [2014] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 47 CanLII Cite: 2014 BCIPC 47 Summary: The applicant, on behalf of
More informationHealth Professions Review Board
Health Professions Review Board Suite 900, 747 Fort Street Victoria British Columbia Telephone: 250 953-4956 Facsimile: 250 953-3195 Toll Free: 888 953-4986 Within B.C. Mailing Address: PO 9429 STN PROV
More informationEnvironmental Appeal Board
Environmental Appeal Board Fourth Floor 747 Fort Street Victoria British Columbia V8W 3E9 Telephone: (250) 387-3464 Facsimile: (250) 356-9923 Mailing Address: PO Box 9425 Stn Prov Govt Victoria BC V8W
More informationEnvironmental Appeal Board
Environmental Appeal Board Fourth Floor 747 Fort Street Victoria British Columbia Telephone: (250) 387-3464 Facsimile: (250) 356-9923 Mailing Address: PO Box 9425 Stn Prov Govt Victoria BC V8W 9V1 DECISION
More informationCOMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINE PROCESS
COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINE PROCESS Approved by CPHR SASKATCHEWAN Board as of September 18, 2009 Updated COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINE PROCESS I Introduction 2 II Definitions 2 III Establishment of CPHR SASKATCHEWAN
More informationOffice of the. British Columbia, Canada. NOTICE OF REVIEW ON THE RECORD Pursuant to section 137(2) Police Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c.
NOTICE OF REVIEW ON THE RECORD Pursuant to section 137(2) Police Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c.267 In the matter of the Review on the Record into the Ordered Investigation of Corporal Trish McLaughlin of the West
More informationFinancial Services Tribunal. Practice Directives and Guidelines
Financial Services Tribunal Practice Directives and Guidelines Revised October 2012 Financial Services Tribunal Practice Directives and Guidelines 1.0 Introduction The purpose of these Practice Directives
More informationOrder F16-15 DISTRICT OF WEST VANCOUVER. Ross Alexander Adjudicator. March 15, 2016
Order F16-15 DISTRICT OF WEST VANCOUVER Ross Alexander Adjudicator March 15, 2016 CanLII Cite: 2016 BCIPC 17 Quicklaw Cite: [2016] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 17 Summary: An applicant requested that the District
More informationOffice of the. British Columbia, Canada. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Pursuant to section 138(1) Police Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c.267
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Pursuant to section 138(1) Police Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c.267 PH: 2016-01 OPCC File: 2011-6657/2012-8138 In the matter of the Public Hearing into the Complaint against Constable
More informationINVESTIGATION REPORT LOBBYIST: Blair Lekstrom. September 24, 2015
INVESTIGATION REPORT 15-05 LOBBYIST: Blair Lekstrom September 24, 2015 SUMMARY: During an environmental scan, Office of the Registrar of Lobbyists ( ORL ) staff discovered a consultant lobbyist who appeared
More informationIn the Supreme Court of British Columbia In the Matter of the Judicial Review Procedure Act R.S.B.C. 1996, c Between: Don Smith Petitioner
No. 0123067 Vancouver Registry In the Supreme Court of British Columbia In the Matter of the Judicial Review Procedure Act R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 241 Between: Don Smith Petitioner And: Betty Jones Respondent
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Between: Date: 20171020 Docket: S114963 Registry: Kelowna Brigitta Pelcz Petitioner And College of Licensed Practical Nurses of British Columbia Respondent Corrected
More informationPENALTY DECISION. January 9, 2015, Vancouver, B.C. Counsel for the Discipline Panel: Ms. Catharine Herb Kelly Q.C. Did not appear and no counsel
THE MATTER OF THE COLLEGE OF DENTAL SURGEONS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA AND DR. MICHAL KABURDA, A REGISTRANT PENALTY DECISION Dr. Arnold Steinbart (Chair) Dr. Myrna Halpenny Mr. Paul Durose } Panel Hearing Date:
More informationINVESTIGATION REPORT LOBBYIST: Dana Hayden. May 2, 2016
INVESTIGATION REPORT 16-06 LOBBYIST: Dana Hayden May 2, 2016 SUMMARY: A consultant lobbyist filed a return to register as a lobbyist on behalf of a client after the deadline required by the Lobbyists Registration
More informationOrder COLLEGE OF DENTAL SURGEONS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
Order 03-17 COLLEGE OF DENTAL SURGEONS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Mary Carlson, Adjudicator April 30, 2003 Quicklaw Cite: [2003] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 17 Document URL: http://www.oipc.bc.ca/orders/order03-17.pdf Office
More informationEnvironmental Appeal Board
Environmental Appeal Board Fourth Floor 747 Fort Street Victoria British Columbia V8W 3E9 Telephone: (250) 387-3464 Facsimile: (250) 356-9923 Mailing Address: PO Box 9425 Stn Prov Govt Victoria BC V8W
More informationFinancial Services Tribunal
Financial Services Tribunal Fourth Floor 747 Fort Street Victoria British Columbia Telephone: (250) 387-3464 Facsimile: (250) 356-9923 Mailing Address: PO Box 9425 Stn Prov Govt Victoria BC V8W 9V1 FST
More informationOffice of the. British Columbia, Canada. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Pursuant to section 138(1) Police Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c.267
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Pursuant to section 138(1) Police Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c.267 In the matter of the Public Hearing into the Conduct of Inspector John de Haas of the Vancouver Police Department PH:
More informationOrder F16-25 BC SECURITIES COMMISSION. Elizabeth Barker Senior Adjudicator. May 17, 2016
Order F16-25 BC SECURITIES COMMISSION Elizabeth Barker Senior Adjudicator May 17, 2016 CanLII Cite: 2016 BCIPC 27 Quicklaw Cite: [2016] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 27 Summary: The applicant requested copies of his
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: British Columbia (Ministry of Justice) v. Maddock, 2015 BCSC 746 Date: 20150423 Docket: 14-3365 Registry: Victoria In the matter of the decisions of the
More informationRESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF THE COLLEGE OF CHIROPRACTORS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA MADE THE 8 th DAY OF DECEMBER 2016 AT VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF THE COLLEGE OF CHIROPRACTORS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA MADE THE 8 th DAY OF DECEMBER 2016 AT VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA RESOLVED THAT, in accordance with the authority established
More informationOil and Gas Appeal Tribunal
Oil and Gas Appeal Tribunal Fourth Floor, 747 Fort Street Victoria, British Columbia Telephone: (250) 387-3464 Facsimile: (250) 356-9923 Mailing Address: PO Box 9425 Stn Prov Govt Victoria BC V8W 9V1 DECISION
More informationDecision F Jay Fedorak, Adjudicator. November 23, 2011
Decision F11-04 COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Jay Fedorak, Adjudicator November 23, 2011 Quicklaw Cite: [2011] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 40 CanLII Cite: 2011 BCIPC 40 Document URL: http://www.oipc.bc.ca/orders/section43/decisionf11-04.pdf
More informationINVESTIGATION REPORT LOBBYIST: Colin Griffith. March 14, Statutes Considered: Lobbyists Registration Act, S.B.C. 2001, c. 42.
INVESTIGATION REPORT 14-04 LOBBYIST: Colin Griffith March 14, 2014 SUMMARY: A consultant lobbyist filed a return to register as a lobbyist on behalf of a client one year after the deadline required by
More information(Ubfli. officeoi the. registrar. lobbyists BRITISH COLUMBIA INVESTIGATION REPORT LOBBYIST: Robert Iasenza 10, July. that the person under
(Ubfli officeoi registrar of lobbyists BRITISH COLUMBIA INVESTIGATION REPORT 17-03 LOBBYIST: Robert Iasenza July 10, 2017 SUMMARY: An individual was in contravention of section 4.1 of Lobbyist Registration
More informationEnvironmental Appeal Board
Environmental Appeal Board Fourth Floor 747 Fort Street Victoria British Columbia Telephone: (250) 387-3464 Facsimile: (250) 356-9923 Mailing Address: PO Box 9425 Stn Prov Govt Victoria BC V8W 9V1 APPEAL
More informationINFORMATION BULLETIN
INFORMATION BULLETIN #25 REVIEW OF ARBITRATIONS - TRANSITIONAL I. INTRODUCTION Most collective agreements provide for grievance arbitration as the method for resolving disputes over the meaning or application
More informationOffice of the. British Columbia, Canada. NOTICE OF REVIEW ON THE RECORD Pursuant to section 138(1) Police Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c.
NOTICE OF REVIEW ON THE RECORD Pursuant to section 138(1) Police Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c.267 OPCC File: 2017-13291 In the matter of the Review on the Record into the Ordered Investigation against Special
More informationOffice of the. British Columbia, Canada. NOTICE OF REVIEW ON THE RECORD Pursuant to section 138(1) Police Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c.
NOTICE OF REVIEW ON THE RECORD Pursuant to section 138(1) Police Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c.267 OPCC File: 2015-11249 In the matter of the Review on the Record into the Ordered Investigation against Constable
More informationOil and Gas Appeal Tribunal
Oil and Gas Appeal Tribunal Fourth Floor, 747 Fort Street Victoria, British Columbia V8W 3E9 Telephone: (250) 387-3464 Facsimile: (250) 356-9923 Mailing Address: PO Box 9425 Stn Prov Govt Victoria BC V8W
More informationEnvironmental Appeal Board
Environmental Appeal Board Fourth Floor 747 Fort Street Victoria British Columbia V8W 3E9 Telephone: (250) 387-3464 Facsimile: (250) 356-9923 Mailing Address: PO Box 9425 Stn Prov Govt Victoria BC V8W
More informationALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F December 10, 2018 EDMONTON POLICE COMMISSION. Case File Number
ALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F2018-74 December 10, 2018 EDMONTON POLICE COMMISSION Case File Number 001251 Office URL: www.oipc.ab.ca Summary: The Applicant made a request
More informationSUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Bresson v.nova Scotia (Community Services), 2016 NSSC 64. v. Nova Scotia (Department of Community Service)
SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Bresson v.nova Scotia (Community Services), 2016 NSSC 64 Date: 20160118 Docket: SYD No. 443281 Registry: Sydney Between: Jainey Lee Bresson v. Nova Scotia (Department
More informationOFFICE OF THE INFORMATION & PRIVACY COMMISSIONER for Prince Edward Island. Order No. FI Re: Department of Communities, Land, and Environment
OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION & PRIVACY COMMISSIONER for Prince Edward Island Order No. FI-16-004 Re: Department of Communities, Land, and Environment Prince Edward Island Information and Privacy Commissioner
More informationJUDICIAL REVIEW. Supreme Court Civil Rule 4-3(6) sets out how service on the Attorney General is affected.
JUDICIAL REVIEW What is it? A judicial review is a review of a decision that has been made by an administrative tribunal or an administrative decision maker. A Supreme Court Justice decides whether the
More informationOrder F17-40 BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSIT CORPORATION. Celia Francis Adjudicator. September 25, 2017
Order F17-40 BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSIT CORPORATION Celia Francis Adjudicator September 25, 2017 CanLII Cite: 2017 BCIPC 44 Quicklaw Cite: [2017] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 44 Summary: A BC Transit driver requested
More informationINVESTIGATION REPORT LOBBYIST: Keltie Gale. May 23, 2018
INVESTIGATION REPORT 18-04 LOBBYIST: Keltie Gale May 23, 2018 SUMMARY: A consultant lobbyist was found to be in contravention of section 3(1) of the Lobbyist Registration Act for failing to file a return
More informationINVESTIGATION REPORT Gateway Casinos & Entertainment Limited. DESIGNATED FILER: Tony Santo. July 6, 2017
INVESTIGATION REPORT 17-05 Gateway Casinos & Entertainment Limited DESIGNATED FILER: Tony Santo July 6, 2017 SUMMARY: Gateway Casinos & Entertainment Limited (Gateway) employs in-house lobbyists. The organization
More informationUSER GUIDE. Consolidated Regulations of British Columbia
Prepared by the Office of Legislative Counsel, Ministry of Attorney General. Please address questions and comments about this User Guide or the Consolidated Regulations of British Columbia to: Registrar
More informationBroken Glass, Broken Trust. A Report of the Investigation into the Complaint Against the City of Surrey
Special Report No. 25 September 2004 to the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia Broken Glass, Broken Trust A Report of the Investigation into the Complaint Against the City of Surrey Table of Contents
More informationOrder F17-46 UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA. Celia Francis Adjudicator. October 19, 2017
Order F17-46 UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Celia Francis Adjudicator October 19, 2017 CanLII Cite: 2017 BCIPC 51 Quicklaw Cite: [2017] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 51 Summary: An applicant requested access to her
More informationOil and Gas Appeal Tribunal
Oil and Gas Appeal Tribunal Fourth Floor, 747 Fort Street Victoria, British Columbia V8W 3E9 Telephone: (250) 387-3464 Facsimile: (250) 356-9923 Mailing Address: PO Box 9425 Stn Prov Govt Victoria BC V8W
More informationA WATER LICENSEE S RIGHT TO EXPROPRIATE LAND (Updated: February 19, 2015)
A WATER LICENSEE S RIGHT TO EXPROPRIATE LAND (Updated: February 19, 2015) A water licence entitles its holder the right to: Expropriate any privately owned land reasonably required for the construction,
More informationIN THE MATTER OF EAGLEMARK VENTURES, LLC, FALCON HOLDINGS, LLC, RICHARD LIAN (also known as RICHARD TERRY RUUSKA) and ENNA M.
Ontario Securities Commission Commission des valeurs mobilières de l Ontario 22nd Floor 20 Queen Street West Toronto ON M5H 3S8 22e étage 20, rue queen oust Toronto ON M5H 3S8 Citation: EagleMark Ventures,
More information889 (05/04) Auditor s Guide. Province of British Columbia
889 (05/04) Auditor s Guide Province of British Columbia Table of Contents Preface 3 Introduction 4 Auditor Appointment 6 Audit Requirement 8 Relevant Dates 9 Terms of Engagement 12 Accounting and Reporting
More informationCover Sheet. The incorporation is to take effect at the time that this application is filed with the Registrar.
PO Box 9431 Stn Prov Govt Victoria BC V8W 9V3 www.corporateonline.gov.bc.ca Location: 2nd Floor - 940 Blanshard Street Victoria BC 1 877 526-1526 Cover Sheet Confirmation of Service Form Filed: Date and
More informationThe British Columbia Utilities Commission: Customer Complaints Guide
The British Columbia Utilities Commission: Customer Complaints Guide FEBRUARY 2017 Table of Contents List of Acronyms and Glossary... 3 1 The Commission... 4 2 Who the Commission Regulates... 4 2.1 Regulated
More informationProduced January 2017 by Community Legal Assistance Society (CLAS) Original author: David Mossop, Q.C.
Options Produced January 2017 by Community Legal Assistance Society (CLAS) Original author: David Mossop, Q.C. 2010 revisions by: Kendra Milne and Jess Hadley 2011 and 2012 revisions by: Jess Hadley (affecting
More informationALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F November 26, 2015 ALBERTA JUSTICE AND SOLICITOR GENERAL
ALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F2015-34 November 26, 2015 ALBERTA JUSTICE AND SOLICITOR GENERAL Case File Number F6898 Office URL: www.oipc.ab.ca Summary: The Applicant
More informationOrder F08-15 COLLEGE OF PSYCHOLOGISTS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA. Michael McEvoy, Adjudicator. September 4, 2008
Order F08-15 COLLEGE OF PSYCHOLOGISTS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Michael McEvoy, Adjudicator September 4, 2008 Quicklaw Cite: [2008] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 27 Document URL: http://www.oipc.bc.ca/orders/orderf08-15.pdf
More informationSeptember 14, No Crown Appeal of Schoenborn High-Risk Accused Ruling
Media Statement September 14, 2017 17-18 No Crown Appeal of Schoenborn High-Risk Accused Ruling Victoria - The BC Prosecution Service (BCPS) announced today that it will not file an appeal from the decision
More information1. In these rules Tribunal means any of the chair, acting chair, panel of members, or a panel of one member, as the case may be.
Huu-ay-aht First Nations Tribunal 500 221 West Esplanade North Vancouver, BC, V7M 3J3 hfntribunal@gmail.com Enacted on November 28, 2011 Tribunal Directive 2011-2 Amended June 1, 2017 Tribunal Directive
More informationOrder F12-12 MINISTRY OF JUSTICE. Catherine Boies Parker, Adjudicator. August 23, 2012
Order F12-12 MINISTRY OF JUSTICE Catherine Boies Parker, Adjudicator August 23, 2012 Quicklaw Cite: [2012] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 17 CanLII Cite: 2012 BCIPC No. 17 Document URL: http://www.oipc.bc.ca/orders/2012/orderf12-12.pdf
More informationRules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy ( the Rules )
Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy ( the Rules ) On 17 May 2018 the ICANN Board adopted a Temporary Specification for gtld Registration Data ("Temporary Specification"). The content
More informationBC Athletic Commissioner - PROFESSIONAL -
for Professional Combat Sport Events APPLICATION PACKAGE This application package contains information on obtaining a one (1) year licence as a contestant for professional combat sport events in the Province
More informationOffice of the Information and Privacy Commissioner Province of British Columbia Order No July 11, 1997
2 Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner Province of British Columbia Order No. 172-1997 July 11, 1997 ISSN 1198-6182 INQUIRY RE: A request by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation for
More informationDepartment of the Premier and Cabinet Circular. PC032 Lobbyist Code of Conduct. October 2009
Department of the Premier and Cabinet Circular PC032 Lobbyist Code of Conduct October 2009 Page 1 of 21 Lobbyist Code of Conduct TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW... 3 2. GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVES
More informationReport of the Chief Electoral Officer on Recommendations for Legislative Change
on Recommendations for Legislative Change on Recommendations for Legislative Change A non-partisan Office of the Legislature Mailing Address: PO Box 9275 Stn Prov Govt Victoria BC V8W 9J6 Location: Suite
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Between: And Bentley v. The Police Complaint Commissioner, 2012 BCSC 106 Craig Bentley and John Grywinski Date: 20120125 Docket: S110977 Registry: Vancouver
More informationHealth Profession Corporations
Health Profession Corporations Information and application for certificate of authorization for a health profession corporation by members of the College of Medical Radiation Technologists of Ontario Date:
More informationRULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
Financial Services Tribunal Tribunal des services financiers RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE FOR PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE FINANCIAL SERVICES TRIBUNAL Ce document est également disponible en français TABLE
More informationSHERIFF POWERS, DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES REGULATION 263/2009
PDF Version [Printer-friendly - ideal for printing entire document] SHERIFF POWERS, DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES REGULATION 263/2009 Published by Quickscribe Services Ltd. Updated To: [includes B.C. Reg.
More informationPRELIMINARY Application for a NEW Authorization. New Permit, Approval, or Operational Certificate
PRELIMINARY Application for a NEW Authorization for authorization to discharge waste under the Environmental Management Act New Permit, Approval, or Operational Certificate FORM REFERENCE CODE: EPD-EMA-01.2
More informationOil and Gas Appeal Tribunal
Oil and Gas Appeal Tribunal Fourth Floor, 747 Fort Street Victoria, British Columbia Telephone: (250) 387-3464 Facsimile: (250) 356-9923 Mailing Address: PO Box 9425 Stn Prov Govt Victoria BC V8W 9V1 Website:
More informationTripartite Education Framework Agreement
Tripartite Education Framework Agreement Artwork by Laatya James of Sen Pok Chin School TRIPARTITE EDUCATION FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT This Agreement is dated for reference the day of, 2012 (the Effective Date
More informationOrder F05-25 MINISTRY OF HEALTH. Errol Nadeau, Adjudicator. August 10, 2005
Order F05-25 MINISTRY OF HEALTH Errol Nadeau, Adjudicator August 10, 2005 Quicklaw Cite: [2005] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 33 Document URL: http://www.oipc.bc.ca/orders/orderf05-33.pdf Office URL: http://www.oipc.bc.ca
More informationONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT J. WILSON, KARAKATSANIS, AND BRYANT JJ. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Ministry of Attorney General and Toronto Star and Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario, 2010 ONSC 991 DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 34/09 DATE: 20100326 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL
More informationGuidance on the Registrar s Rule 9 power of review (July 2017)
Guidance on the Registrar s Rule 9 power of review (July 2017) 1 Introduction 1. Since 1 November 2016, the GDC s Registrar has had the power to review decisions to close cases without referring them to
More informationOrder F07-07 ELECTIONS BRITISH COLUMBIA. David Loukidelis, Information and Privacy Commissioner. March 30, 2007
Order F07-07 ELECTIONS BRITISH COLUMBIA David Loukidelis, Information and Privacy Commissioner March 30, 2007 Quicklaw Cite: [2007] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 9 Document URL: http://www.oipc.bc.ca/orders/orderf07-07.pdf
More informationBC Registry Services DEC *Id SOCIETY ACT COPY OF RESOLUTION. El a directors' resolution "RESOLVED
*Id BR I It Sii COL1., 111A BC Registry Services Form 10 (Section 66 and 67) Certificate of Incorporation No. S-57779 The following is a copy of El a special resolution* passed 0 an ordinary resolution
More information1 October Code of CONDUCT
1 October 2006 Code of CONDUCT The Australian migration advice profession sets high standards. Their high levels of knowledge of Australian migration law/procedures and professional and ethical conduct
More informationOffice of the Police Complaint Commissioner British Columbia, Canada
Office of the Police omplaint ommissioner British olumbia, anada Fair Independent Principled VIA E-MAIL: patti.marfleet@vancouverpoliceboard.ca His Worship Mayor Gregor Robertson hair Vancouver Police
More informationALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F February 9, 2018 ALBERTA JUSTICE AND SOLICITOR GENERAL
ALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F2018-08 February 9, 2018 ALBERTA JUSTICE AND SOLICITOR GENERAL Case File Number 000909 Office URL: www.oipc.ab.ca Summary: The Applicant
More informationMEDIA STATEMENT CRIMINAL JUSTICE BRANCH
MEDIA STATEMENT CRIMINAL JUSTICE BRANCH May 12, 2011 11-09 Charges Laid in Relation to Testimony at Braidwood Inquiry Victoria The Criminal Justice Branch of the Ministry of Attorney General today announced
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Between: And: Varner v. Vancouver (City), 2009 BCSC 333 Gary Varner Date: 20090226 Docket: S032834 Registry: Vancouver Plaintiff John Doe and Richard
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Between: And Westergaard v. Registrar of Mortgage Brokers, 2010 BCSC 912 Keith Bryan Westergaard and GET Acceptance Corporation Registrar of Mortgage
More informationCHAPTER 14 CONSULTATIONS AND DISPUTE SETTLEMENT. Article 1: Definitions
CHAPTER 14 CONSULTATIONS AND DISPUTE SETTLEMENT For the purposes of this Chapter: Article 1: Definitions Parties to the dispute means the complaining Party or Parties and the Party complained against;
More informationALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F March 28, 2017 WORKERS COMPENSATION BOARD. Case File Number F8005
ALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F2017-37 March 28, 2017 WORKERS COMPENSATION BOARD Case File Number F8005 Office URL: www.oipc.ab.ca Summary: The Applicant made a correction
More informationTHE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE ORDER
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE ORDER Pursuant to Part II, Article 73-a of the New Hampshire Constitution and Supreme Court Rule 51, the Supreme Court of New Hampshire adopts
More informationOrder COLLEGE OF OPTICIANS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
Order 02-35 COLLEGE OF OPTICIANS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA David Loukidelis, Information and Privacy Commissioner July 16, 2002 Quicklaw Cite: [2002] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 35 Document URL: http://www.oipc.bc.ca/orders/order02-35.pdf
More informationIf you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact the Commission.
September 15, 2017 Enforcement File: 2017-186FSJ KANATA Energy Group Ltd. 1900 112 4th Avenue SW Calgary, Alberta T2P 0H3 Attention: Mike Dever, Vice President of Operations Re: General Order 2017-087
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA
Citation: Dorn v Association of Professional Engineers Date: 20180305 and Geoscientists of the Province of Manitoba, Docket: AI17-30-08819 2018 MBCA 18 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA Coram: Mr. Justice
More informationForest Appeals Commission
Forest Appeals Commission Fourth Floor 747 Fort Street Victoria British Columbia Telephone: (250) 387-3464 Facsimile: (250) 356-9923 Mailing Address: PO Box 9425 Stn Prov Govt Victoria BC V8W 9V1 Website:
More informationGUIDE TO PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE IMMIGRATION DIVISION
GUIDE TO PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE IMMIGRATION DIVISION Legal Services Table of Contents About the Guide to Proceedings Before the Immigration Division ii, iii Notes and references..iv Chapter 1... POWERS
More informationDecember 10, Special Prosecutor issues Clear Statement re: Draft Multicultural Strategic Outreach Plan
Media Statement December 10, 2018 18-25 Special Prosecutor issues Clear Statement re: Draft Multicultural Strategic Outreach Plan Victoria The BC Prosecution Service announced today that Special Prosecutor
More information