Re: JAMES DONALD WOOSTER. Leon Getz, Chair, Robert C. Blanchard and Daniel Siu. Barbara Lohmann for the Investment Dealers Association
|
|
- Clarence Brent Hopkins
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IN THE MATTER OF A DISCIPLINE HEARING PURSUANT TO BY-LAW 20 OF THE INVESTMENT DEALERS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA PACIFIC DISTRICT COUNCIL Re: JAMES DONALD WOOSTER Panel: Appearances: Leon Getz, Chair, Robert C. Blanchard and Daniel Siu Barbara Lohmann for the Investment Dealers Association No appearance for Mr. Wooster Hearing held: July 28, December 15 and 16, 2003 Introduction PENALTY DECISION [1] In a Decision dated May 5, 2004 (the Earlier Decision ) we concluded, for reasons that we set out, that the Respondent, Donald James Wooster: (b) failed to use due diligence to learn essential facts concerning his client in breach of Association Regulation (Notice of Hearing, paragraph 1); in February 1993, unilaterally and without the knowledge or consent of his client, RM, amended her stated investment objectives for her cash account, as set out in the relevant New Client Account Form, in breach of Association Bylaw 29.1 (Notice of Hearing, paragraph 2); in June 1993, unilaterally and without RM s knowledge or consent, in breach of Association Bylaw 29.1, amended the stated investment objectives for both her cash and her RRSP accounts (Notice of Hearing, paragraph 4) and did so by completing a single NCAF, in breach of his obligation under Association Regulation to use due diligence to learn the essential facts relative to every account accepted (Notice of Hearing, paragraph 3);
2 2 (b) between May 24 and November 20, 1995 effected a total of 10 unauthorized trades in RM s margin and RRSP accounts, in breach of Association Bylaw 29.1 (Notice of Hearing, paragraph 6); (c) (d) (e) between July 1991 and September 1997, in breach of Association Regulation (c), recommended to RM purchases in each of her cash, RRSP and margin accounts that unreasonably exceeded her actual investment objectives with respect to those accounts (Notice of Hearing, paragraph 7); between February 24, 1993 and January 22, 1997 Mr. Wooster, in breach of Association Regulation (c), recommended the purchase of certain specific securities in RM s accounts that were not suitable for purchase by her (Notice of Hearing, paragraph 8) 1 ; in around October 2000 and April 2001 Mr. Wooster, in breach of Association By-law 29.1, misrepresented to his client, KP, the status of certain funds deposited in KP s margin account but belonging to KP s brother (Notice of Hearing, paragraph 9); and (f) in around March 2001 Mr. Wooster, in breach of Association By-law 29.1, made certain misrepresentations to his employer concerning the margin account of his client, KP (Notice of Hearing, paragraph 10). [2] In the Earlier Decision we invited written submissions from the Association and Mr. Wooster as to appropriate sanctions for the breaches identified, and proposed a timetable for these submissions. We said that we would, on request, receive supplementary oral submissions. [3] Mr. Wooster advised us that he did not intend to make any further submissions, in writing or orally, and he has not done so. The Association has made written submissions but did not seek to make supplementary oral representations. General Framework [4] In January 2003 the Association approved a document entitled Disciplinary Sanctions Guidelines (the Guidelines ). The introduction to the Guidelines includes the following: The securities industry is a business of trust and confidence. As the industry's national self-regulatory organization, the Association regulates the activities of its Member firms and the approved persons employed by those Member firms in terms of their capital adequacy and conduct of business. To qualify as a Member firm, an organization must meet stringent capital requirements and demonstrate an ability and willingness to conduct its business in a manner consistent with the Securities Act(s) of the province or provinces 1 There is a typographical error in paragraph 70(f) of the Earlier Decision. The reference there to paragraph 76 below should be a reference to paragraphs 52 and 54 above.
3 3 in which registration is held, and adhere to the By-laws, Regulations, Policies and Rulings of the Association. Approved persons share analogous responsibilities, and must above all conduct themselves with trustworthiness and integrity, and act in an honest and fair manner in all their dealings with the public, their clients, and the securities industry as a whole. Association By-law 20 ( Approvals and Discipline ) provides that a District Council of the Association has the power to impose specified penalties where it has been found that an individual registrant or a Member firm fails to comply with the Association's By-laws, Regulations, Policies and Rulings. A District Council also may impose penalties where a registrant has failed to comply with applicable securities regulations or engages in any business conduct or practice which such Council in its discretion considers unbecoming a Member or not in the public interest. Pursuant to paragraph of the Association's By-Laws, a District Council is authorized to impose sanctions that may include any one or a combination of: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) a reprimand; a fine up to $1,000,000 per offence or an amount equal to three times the pecuniary benefit obtained as a result of any violation, whichever is greater; suspension for a specified period of a Member's rights and privileges or of an individual's approval to act as a partner, director, officer or employee of a Member, possibly on terms; termination of a Member's membership and the accompanying rights and privileges or revocation of an individual's approval; expulsion of a Member from the Association or prohibition of an individual's approval for any period of time; and imposition of terms and conditions on a Member or conditions on a subsequent approval or continued approval of an individual, as the District Council considers appropriate in the circumstances. As paragraph provides no guidance on the imposition of the penalties it authorizes, the penalty is left to the discretion of the District Council to be determined in light of the circumstances of each case. In making their determinations as to penalty, in the past, District Councils have looked to sources that reflect industry understandings and expectations. These sources have included The Toronto Stock Exchange's Penalty Guidelines for Disciplinary Proceedings (November 5, 1996) (the "TSE Guidelines") [recently superceded by the Market Regulation Services Inc. Sanction Guidelines for RS Disciplinary Proceedings- August 2002] and the NASD Sanction Guidelines (2001). Although the TSE and NASD Guidelines are not binding on the District Council, they have been cited with approval. In its decision in Re Milewski, [1999] I.D.A.C.D. No. 17, the Ontario District Council held it reasonable to treat such guidelines as indicative of industry expectations and as relevant to a penalty determination, although neither exhaustive nor determinative. [5] The Guidelines set out principles and rules designed to provide a framework for assessing the gravity of a particular breach of the Association s By-laws, Regulations,
4 Rules and Policies, and help to determine which sanction(s) is reasonable in the circumstances. These principles and rules include the following: 1. Disciplinary Sanctions Are Remedial In Nature As set out in Re Derivative Services Inc., [2000] I.D.A.C.D. No.26, at page 3, a District Council's main concerns in determining an appropriate penalty are: 1. Protection of the investing public; 2. Protection of the Investment Dealers Association s membership; 3. Protection of the integrity of the Investment Dealers Association s process; 4. Protection of the integrity of the securities markets, and 5. Prevention of a repetition of conduct of the type under consideration. 4 The penalty imposed in a specific proceeding should reflect the District Council's assessment of the measures necessary in the specific case to accomplish these goals, ranging from a reprimand to an absolute bar, and may take into account the seriousness of the respondent's conduct and specific and general deterrence. 2. Disciplinary Sanctions As Deterrence Registrants and Member firms have significant responsibilities that they must meet if investors are to be protected and market integrity maintained. Registrants who choose to act in ways that threaten the integrity of the capital markets must have the expectation that they will be held accountable through enforcement action by regulators. Sanctions should be based on the circumstances of the particular misconduct by a respondent with an aim at general deterrence. General deterrence will follow from an appropriate decision and deter others from engaging in similar misconduct and improve overall business standards in the securities industry. This can be achieved if a sanction strikes an appropriate balance by addressing a registrant s specific misconduct, but also being in line with industry expectations. As was observed by the Ontario District Council in Re Mills, [2001] I.D.A.C.D. No. 7, April 17, 2001, at p. 3: Industry expectations and understandings are particularly relevant to general deterrence. If a penalty is less than industry understandings would lead its Members to expect for the conduct under consideration, it may undermine the goals of the Association's disciplinary process; similarly, excessive penalties may reduce respect for the process and concomitantly diminish its deterrent effect. Thus the responsibility of the District Council in a penalty hearing is to determine a penalty appropriate to the conduct and respondent before it, reflecting that its primary purpose is prevention rather than punishment. However, an important objective of the disciplinary process is to deter future misconduct by imposing progressively escalating sanctions on repeat offenders. For this reason, when appropriate, a District Council should consider a respondent s relevant disciplinary history in determining sanctions. Relevant disciplinary history may include past misconduct similar to that at issue; or (b) past misconduct that, while unrelated to the misconduct at issue, evidences prior disregard for regulatory requirements, investor
5 protection, or commercial integrity. Even if a respondent has no history of relevant misconduct, however, the misconduct at issue may be so serious as to justify a higher penalty. [6] In exercising our discretion under Association By-law to determine the appropriate penalties for the infractions that we found that Mr. Wooster committed, we have taken into account both the Guidelines and the principles and rules. 5 [7] One relevant factor, it is clear, is Mr. Wooster s disciplinary history. It is summarized in paragraph 90 of the summary of facts contained in the Notice of Hearing (the Summary 2 ) as follows: The Respondent was disciplined by the Association in 2000 for failing to use due diligence to ensure that recommendations he made for a client were appropriate and in keeping with that client's investment objectives (Association Regulation (c)) and for failing to use due diligence to ensure that he learned the essential facts relative to his client (Association Regulation ). This conduct transpired between November 1992 to August For these infractions, the Respondent was fined $12,000 and as a condition of continued approval, he was required to re-write and pass the Conduct and Practices Handbook for Securities Industry Professionals examination. In addition, the Respondent was required to pay $2,000 toward the Association's costs. [8] Against this background, we turn to the breaches that we have found were committed by Mr. Wooster. Breaches of Association Regulation [9] We found that Mr. Wooster violated Association Regulation which requires due diligence to learn and remain informed of the essential facts relative to every customer - and Association Regulation (c) which requires due diligence to ensure that recommendations made to a client are suitable based on, among other things, the client s financial situation, investment knowledge, investment objectives and risk tolerance in each case in two respects. [10] The two breaches of Association Regulation were: (i) (ii) including in the NCAF of his client, RM, information about her that was demonstrably wrong in a number of fundamental respects, including her occupation, income and net worth, and investment knowledge and experience ; 3 and using a single NCAF to change the investment objectives of both RM s cash account and her RRSP account. 4 2 See paragraph 90 of the Summary, attached to the Earlier Decision. 3 Paragraphs 16 to 19 of the Earlier Decision. 4 Paragraph 26 of the Earlier Decision.
6 [11] The two breaches of Association Regulation (c) were: 6 (i) (ii) making recommendations to RM for the purchase securities that resulted in both her actual and her stated investment objectives being exceeded; 5 and making recommendations to RM for the purchase of specific securities that were not suitable for purchase by her. 6 [12] We have reservations as to whether, in the scheme of things, the use of a single NCAF to effect a change the investment objectives in two different accounts is particularly significant. Each of the other breaches identified, however, represents a disregard of the know your client rule which the Guidelines describe, appropriately, as being of paramount importance for the securities industry. [13] The Guidelines suggest a variety of possible sanctions for breaches of this kind, among them a minimum fine of $10,000 for each breach. The Association has proposed the imposition of an aggregate fine of $25,000 in respect of these matters. Breaches of Association Bylaw 29.1 [14] So far as material, Association By-Law 29.1 says that participants in the securities industry: (i) shall observe high standards of ethics and conduct in the transaction of their business, (ii) shall not engage in any business conduct or practice which is unbecoming or detrimental to the public interest, and (iii) shall be of such character and business repute and have such experience and training as is consistent with the standards described in clauses (i) and (ii).... [15] In our Earlier Decision we concluded that the Association s complaints that Mr. Wooster committed the following breaches of By-Law 29.1, were well-founded: (b) that in February 1993, unilaterally and without the knowledge or consent of his client, RM, he amended the stated investment objectives for her cash account, as set out in the relevant NCAF; that in June 1993, unilaterally and without RM s knowledge or consent, he amended the stated investment objectives for both her cash and her RRSP accounts; (c) that between May 24 and November 20, 1995 he effected a total of 10 unauthorized trades in RM s margin and RRSP accounts, 5 Paragraphs 38 and 39 of the Earlier Decision. 6 Paragraphs 40 to 49 of the Earlier Decision.
7 7 (d) (e) that in around October 2000 and in April 2001 he misrepresented to his client, KP, the status of certain funds deposited in KP s margin account but belonging to KP s brother; and that in around March 2001 he made certain misrepresentations to his employer concerning the margin account of his client, KP. [16] Each of these complaints involves a betrayal of a client or an employer. Cumulatively, and in particular when considered in the light of the fact that in many respects they echo complaints that were the subject of the Settlement Agreement with the Association that Mr. Wooster signed in , they reflect a startling pattern of indifference to the standards of conduct reflected in By-Law 29.1, the interests of clients and employers and the industry of which Mr. Wooster was a part. [17] It is difficult to overstate the seriousness of any of this conduct. Each of the elements involves, to put it simply, rank dishonesty. No mitigating circumstances have been suggested nor can we think of any. [18] The Association has proposed the following fines in respect of the breaches of By-Law 29.1: (i) in respect of the unilateral and unauthorized changes to RM s investment objectives, $15,000; (ii) in respect of the 10 unauthorized trades, $25,000; (iii) in respect of the misrepresentation to KP concerning his brother s funds, $25,000; and (iv) in respect of Mr. Wooster s misrepresentations to his employer, $15,000, for an aggregate fine, in respect of breaches of By-Law 29.1, of $80,000. [19] The Association also seeks an order that Mr. Wooster disgorge $2,236.50, being the aggregate commission he earned in respect of the 10 unauthorized trades. [20] Having regard to: (b) (c) the nature and seriousness of Mr. Wooster s breaches; the principles and rules contained in the Guidelines; Mr. Wooster s disciplinary history, the distinct similarity between many of the breaches that he acknowledged in his 2000 Settlement Agreement and those that we have found were committed here, and his steadfast refusal to 7 See paragraph 7 above.
8 8 acknowledge any wrongdoing even in the face of persuasive evidence to the contrary; and (d) precedent decisions of similar panels cited to us by counsel for the Association that we have considered, we have reached the conclusion that the aggregate fine of $105,000 proposed by the Association in respect of all of the breaches that we have found that Mr. Wooster committed, is appropriate, and our order, accordingly, is that he pay a fine of $105,000. We also order that Mr. Wooster disgorge the amount of $2, in commissions that he earned on the 10 unauthorized trades. [21] The Association has also presented evidence that staff costs of approximately $118,000 were incurred by it in connection with the investigation into and prosecution of the complaints against Mr. Wooster. It has asked that we order that he pay $40,000, representing approximately 33% of those costs. In coming to the conclusion that this is a reasonable request by the Association, we have taken account of the fact that we found that one of the important allegations against Mr. Wooster that he misled his client, RM, about the reason she was required to open a margin account was not proved. 8 [22] The Association has also sought orders that: Mr. Wooster be declared ineligible for approval in any capacity by the Association for a period of one year from the date of this decision; it be a condition of Mr. Wooster s eligibility for approval by the Association in any capacity that he have successfully completed the CPH; it be a condition of Mr. Wooster s eligibility for approval by the Association in any capacity that he have paid in full the aggregate fine of $105,000, the costs of $40,000 and the $2, in commissions that we have ordered that he disgorge. [23] We consider the second and third of these orders to be entirely appropriate. In our opinion, however, to impose an ineligibility period of one year, as contemplated in the first order, would be little more than a gesture. We have already noted the seriousness of Mr. Wooster s infractions and that they all involve, in one form or another, betrayal or dishonesty. In the circumstances, we have reached the conclusion that it is appropriate and in the public interest that Mr. Wooster be declared ineligible for approval in any capacity by the Association for a period of three years from the date of this decision. [24] In summary, we order that Mr. Wooster: pay an aggregate fine of $25,000 in respect of the breaches of Regulation 1300; 8 See paragraphs 27 to 33 of the Earlier Decision.
9 9 (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) pay an aggregate fine of $80,000 in respect of the breaches of By-law 29.1; disgorge the sum of $2, in improperly earned commissions; pay $40,000 of the costs incurred by the Association in connection with these proceedings; is ineligible for approval in any capacity by the Association for a period of 3 years from the date of this decision; is ineligible for approval in any capacity by the Association unless he has successfully completed the CPH; and is ineligible for approval in any capacity by the Association unless he has paid in full the amounts specified in paragraphs to (d) inclusive. On behalf of the panel Leon Getz (Chair) Vancouver, July 9, 2004
IN THE MATTER OF THE INVESTMENT DEALERS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA (ENFORCEMENT DIVISION) AND XAVIER CHENG KUO LI
IN THE MATTER OF THE INVESTMENT DEALERS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA (ENFORCEMENT DIVISION) AND XAVIER CHENG KUO LI DECISION OF A HEARING PANEL OF THE PACIFIC DISTRICT COUNCIL OF THE INVESTMENT DEALERS ASSOCIATION
More informationRe Ahrens. The Dealer Member Rules of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada 2014 IIROC 46
Re Ahrens IN THE MATTER OF: The Dealer Member Rules of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada and Robert Justin Ahrens 2014 IIROC 46 Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada
More informationRe Rao. The Dealer Member Rules of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC)
Re Rao IN THE MATTER OF: The Dealer Member Rules of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC) and The By-Laws of the Investment Dealers Association of Canada (IDA) and Gregory Rao
More informationIN THE MATTER OF DISCIPLINE PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO BY-LAW 20 OF THE INVESTMENT DEALERS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA. Re: MICHAEL ROBERT DE LONG
IN THE MATTER OF DISCIPLINE PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO BY-LAW 20 OF THE INVESTMENT DEALERS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA Re: MICHAEL ROBERT DE LONG Heard: March 9, 2005 Decision: March 22, 2005 Hearing Panel: Eric
More informationIN THE MATTER OF THE SECURITIES ACT, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.5, AS AMENDED - AND -
Ontario Commission des P.O. Box 55, 19 th Floor CP 55, 19e étage Securities valeurs mobilières 20 Queen Street West 20, rue queen ouest Commission de l Ontario Toronto ON M5H 3S8 Toronto ON M5H 3S8 IN
More informationRules Notice Request for Comment
Rules Notice Request for Comment Dealer Member Rules and UMIR Please distribute internally to: Legal and Compliance Operations Senior Management Comments Due By: May 23, 2018 Contact: Elsa Renzella Senior
More informationIN THE MATTER OF THE BY-LAWS OF THE INVESTMENT DEALERS IDA OF CANADA. Re: JORY CAPITAL INC., PATRICK MICHAEL COONEY AND REES MERTHYN JONES
IN THE MATTER OF THE BY-LAWS OF THE INVESTMENT DEALERS IDA OF CANADA Re: JORY CAPITAL INC., PATRICK MICHAEL COONEY AND REES MERTHYN JONES Heard: April 5 and 6; November 28, 2005 Decision: January 5, 2006
More informationOctober Guideline to Disciplinary Committee for Determining Disciplinary Orders
October 2017 Guideline to Disciplinary Committee for Determining Disciplinary Orders HKICPA Guideline to Disciplinary Committee for Determining Disciplinary Orders 1. Objectives of the Guideline 1.1. This
More informationRule 8200 Enforcement Proceedings Introduction Definitions PART A - GENERAL Hearings
Rule 8200 Enforcement Proceedings 8201. Introduction (1) This Rule sets out the authority of IIROC and hearing panels to hold hearings for enforcement purposes. (2) Enforcement proceedings are intended
More informationDISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE COLLEGE OF NURSES OF ONTARIO
DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE COLLEGE OF NURSES OF ONTARIO This decision was followed by an appeal, the results of which can be found at the end of this document. PANEL: Sarah Corkey, RN Chairperson Susan
More informationEnforcement Proceedings Framework for Enforcement Sanctions and Costs
market bulletin Ref: Y4795 Title Purpose Enforcement Proceedings Framework for Enforcement Sanctions and Costs To inform the market about the new framework for setting sanctions and costs orders in Lloyd
More informationAccountancy Scheme Sanctions Guidance
Guidance Financial Reporting Council April 2018 Accountancy Scheme Sanctions Guidance The FRC s mission is to promote transparency and integrity in business. The FRC sets the UK Corporate Governance and
More informationRe: JAMES MICHAEL BRENNAN
IN THE MATTER OF A DISCIPLINE HEARING PURSUANT TO BY-LAW 20 OF THE INVESTMENT DEALERS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA Re: JAMES MICHAEL BRENNAN Heard: April 28, 2004. District Council: The Honourable John B. Webber,
More informationLAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT; AND IN THE MATTER OF A HEARING REGARDING THE CONDUCT OF R.
LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT; AND IN THE MATTER OF A HEARING REGARDING THE CONDUCT OF R. FRANK LLEWELLYN, A MEMBER OF THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA Hearing Committee: Gillian
More informationNRPSI INDICATIVE SANCTIONS GUIDANCE
NRPSI INDICATIVE SANCTIONS GUIDANCE Introduction Purpose of sanctions Warnings What sanctions are available Questions for the Panel to consider Mitigation and aggravating factors Guidance on considering
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 informationRULE 19 EXAMINATIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS
INVESTMENT INDUSTRY REGULATORY ORGANIZATION OF CANADA AMENDMENTS TO DEALER MEMBER RULES ON LIMITATION OF ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS BLACK-LINE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 19, RULE 20.7, AND RULES 20.30
More informationINVESTMENT DEALERS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA ROBERT WILLIAM BOSWELL
INVESTMENT DEALERS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA IN THE MATTER OF: THE BY-LAWS OF THE INVESTMENT DEALERS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA AND ROBERT WILLIAM BOSWELL NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE is hereby given that pursuant
More informationIndicative Sanctions Guidance Note
Indicative Sanctions Guidance Note Introduction The CAA Global Limited Board ( the Board ) has prepared this guidance note for use by Adjudication Panels, Interim Order Panel, Disciplinary Tribunal Panels
More informationGuide to sanctioning
Guide to sanctioning Contents 1. Background. 2 2. Application for registration or continued registration 3 3. Purpose of sanctions. 3 4. Principles in determining sanction.. 4 A. Proportionality... 4 B.
More informationCHARTERED PROFESSIONAL ACCOUNTANTS OF ONTARIO
CHARTERED PROFESSIONAL ACCOUNTANTS OF ONTARIO REGULATION 7-3 DISCIPLINE AND APPEAL Adopted by the Council pursuant to the Bylaws on June 16, 2011, continued under the Chartered Professional Accountants
More informationIN THE MATTER OF The Securities Act S.N.B. 2004, c. S and - IN THE MATTER OF. STEVEN VINCENT WEERES and REBEKAH DONSZELMANN (RESPONDENTS)
IN THE MATTER OF The Securities Act S.N.B. 2004, c. S-5.5 - and - IN THE MATTER OF STEVEN VINCENT WEERES and REBEKAH DONSZELMANN (RESPONDENTS) REASONS FOR THE DECISION ON SANCTIONS Date of Hearing by Conference
More informationTHE REAL ESTATE COUNCIL OF ALBERTA. AB, for executive director of the Real Estate Council of Alberta Michael Eurchuk, in person
Case: 006466 THE REAL ESTATE COUNCIL OF ALBERTA Process: A Hearing under Part 3 of the Real Estate Act Industry Member: Michael Eurchuk Hearing Panel: Appearances: Bobbi Dawson (Chair Gordon Reekie David
More informationRe Sole. The Rules of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada 2018 IIROC 19
Re Sole IN THE MATTER OF: The Rules of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada and Robert Edward Sole 2018 IIROC 19 Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada Hearing Panel
More informationIN THE MATTER OF A DISCIPLINE HEARING PURSUANT TO BY-LAW 20 OF THE INVESTMENT DEALERS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA. Quebec District Council.
IN THE MATTER OF A DISCIPLINE HEARING PURSUANT TO BY-LAW 20 OF THE INVESTMENT DEALERS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA Quebec District Council Re: SERGE BÉLEC NOTICE OF HEARING AND PARTICULARS NOTICE is hereby given
More informationPROFESSIONAL ETHICS COMMITTEE PROCEDURES MANUAL
PROFESSIONAL ETHICS COMMITTEE PROCEDURES MANUAL NOVEMBER 19, 2014 NEW YORK STATE SOCIETY OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS 14 WALL STREET NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10005 PROFESSIONAL ETHICS COMMITTEE PROCEDURES
More information1. Miss Musaji had not responded at all to the Notice of Hearing. The Panel therefore proceeded on the basis that the above charge was not admitted.
Disciplinary Panel Meeting Case of Miss Zainab Musaji [6498352] London, NW9, UK On Tuesday 31 July 2018 At RICS, 55 Colmore Row, Birmingham, B3 2AS Panel John Anderson (Lay Chair) Patrick Bligh-Cheesman
More informationIN THE MATIER OF a Proceeding under the Certified General Accountants Act, 2010 and the Bylaws
IN THE MATIER OF a Proceeding under the Certified General Accountants Act, 2010 and the Bylaws IN THE MATIER OF Thuy Nguyen, a member of The Certified General Accountants Association of Ontario BETWEEN:
More informationSANCTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
SANCTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENT November 2017 Introduction If a complaint is referred to the Disciplinary Committee of the Teaching Council for an inquiry, a panel of the Disciplinary Committee consisting of
More informationCONTENTS PAGE NUMBER. INTRODUCTION 3 A. PRINCIPLES AND PROCEDURE 4-7 SANCTIONS AND ORDERS AVAILABLE TO THE TRIBUNAL Solicitors Solicitors employees
08.12.16 2 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 3 A. PRINCIPLES AND PROCEDURE 4-7 SANCTIONS AND ORDERS AVAILABLE TO THE TRIBUNAL Solicitors Solicitors employees PURPOSE OF SANCTIONS AND TRIBUNAL S APPROACH 5-6 HUMAN
More informationTHE CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTANTS
THE CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTANTS DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE RULES 2015 RULE CONTENT 1 Introduction 2 Interpretation 3 Jurisdiction 4 Preliminary matters; Notification of referral; Meeting
More informationTHERE IS AN ORDER MADE PURSUANT TO S 240 LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS ACT 2006 FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF MEDICAL DETAILS.
THERE IS AN ORDER MADE PURSUANT TO S 240 LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS ACT 2006 FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF MEDICAL DETAILS. PLEASE SEE ORDER 5 ON PAGE 10 FOR FULL SUPPRESSION DETAILS. NEW ZEALAND LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS
More informationIndicative Sanctions Guidance
Indicative Sanctions Guidance 1 Contents 1. Introduction... 3 2. Purpose... 3 3. General principles... 3 4. Sanctions... 3 In the case of all members, regardless of membership type... 3 In the case of
More informationAdministrative Sanctions: imposing warnings and fines
Administrative Sanctions: imposing warnings and fines Introduction This leaflet provides an overview of the Bar Standards Board s (BSB s) use of administrative sanctions as one of the tools available to
More informationIndicative Sanctions Guidance
Indicative Sanctions Guidance AAT is a registered charity. No. 1050724 Indicative Sanctions Guidance Contents Introduction... 3 Policy detail... 4 Sanctions... 5 Aggravating factors... 7 Mitigation...
More informationDelegated powers policy
Delegated powers policy Revised September 2013 1 Contents Introduction... 3 The Association of Accounting Technicians... 3 The compliance framework and procedures of AAT... 3 Compliance framework... 4
More information107 ADOPTED RESOLUTION
ADOPTED RESOLUTION 1 2 3 RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association reaffirms the black letter of the ABA Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions as adopted February, 1986, and amended February 1992,
More informationOntario Swimming Coaches Committee Disciplinary and Complaints Procedures
Ontario Swimming Coaches Committee Disciplinary and Complaints Procedures Purpose 1. Membership as a Swim Ontario Coach brings with it many benefits and privileges. At the same time, Swim Ontario Member
More informationAmendments to IIROC Rule 20 Corporation Hearing Processes to Eliminate IIROC s Appeal Panels and Response to Public Comment RULE 20
13.1.2 Amendments to IIROC Rule 20 Corporation Hearing Processes to Eliminate IIROC s Appeal Panels and Response to Public Comment PART 1 DEFINITIONS 20.1 In this Rule: "Applicant" means: RULE 20 CORPORATION
More informationINDICATIVE SANCTIONS GUIDANCE DRAFT
INDICATIVE SANCTIONS GUIDANCE DRAFT Contents Purpose of document... 2 What is this document about?... 2 Who is this document for?... 3 1. Part 1: Fitness to Practise stages... 3 Investigation... 3 Scrutiny
More informationNORTHERN IRELAND SOCIAL CARE COUNCIL
NORTHERN IRELAND SOCIAL CARE COUNCIL BRIBERY POLICY FINAL SEPTMBER 2012 1. INTRODUCTION The Bribery Act 2010 (the Act) introduces a new, clearer regime for tackling bribery that applies to all commercial
More informationLAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT; AND IN THE MATTER OF A HEARING REGARDING THE CONDUCT OF KEITH SHUSTOV,
LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT; AND IN THE MATTER OF A HEARING REGARDING THE CONDUCT OF KEITH SHUSTOV, A SUSPENDED MEMBER OF THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA Hearing Committee:
More informationThe Law Society of Saskatchewan
The Law Society of Saskatchewan RUSSELL PEET HEARING DATE: April 5, 2017 DECISION DATE: January 26, 2018 ADDENDUM TO HEARING DECISION DATE: January 26, 2018 Law Society of Saskatchewan v. Peet, 2018 SKLSS
More informationIN THE MATTER OF THE INVESTMENT DEALERS ASSOCIATION AND TIFFANY YEN SIAM MU DECISION OF THE PANEL OF THE PACIFIC DISTRICT COUNCIL
IN THE MATTER OF THE INVESTMENT DEALERS ASSOCIATION AND TIFFANY YEN SIAM MU DECISION OF THE PANEL OF THE PACIFIC DISTRICT COUNCIL Introduction Pursuant to a Notice of Hearing dated November 8, 2005 (the
More informationIN THE MATTER OF THE PSYCHOLOGISTS ACT, 1997, AMENDED 2004, AND BYLAWS AND IN THE MATTER OF A COMPLAINT AGAINST GINA KEMPTON-DOANE
IN THE MATTER OF THE PSYCHOLOGISTS ACT, 1997, AMENDED 2004, AND BYLAWS AND IN THE MATTER OF A COMPLAINT AGAINST GINA KEMPTON-DOANE DECISION Saskatchewan College of Psychologists DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE Discipline
More information1. BG s Constitution, its Regulations and the various conditions of membership, registration and affiliation together require that:
British Gymnastics Complaints & Disciplinary Procedures These procedures were amended on Thursday 21 st February 2013 and approved by the Ethics and Welfare Committee. All previous procedures are superseded
More informationTHE REAL ESTATE COUNCIL OF ALBERTA
THE REAL ESTATE COUNCIL OF ALBERTA IN THE MATTER OF Section 39(1)(b)(i), s.41 and s.47(1) of the REAL ESTATE ACT, R.S.A. 2000, c.r-5 AND IN THE MATTER OF a Hearing regarding the conduct of GARRY ROLAND
More informationTHE REAL ESTATE COUNCIL OF ALBERTA
THE REAL ESTATE COUNCIL OF ALBERTA IN THE MATTER OF Section 39(1)(b)(i), s.41 and s.47(1) of the REAL ESTATE ACT, R.S.A. 2000, c.r-5 AND IN THE MATTER OF a Hearing regarding the conduct of STEVE SEDGWICK,
More informationThe ITV Management Board is ultimately responsible for overseeing compliance with this policy.
Anti-Bribery Policy Bribery Policy at a glance for ITV staff Don t: pay or receive any bribes, including any facilitation payments give or accept any gifts in cash or cash equivalents make any charitable
More informationIN THE MATTER OF THE INVESTMENT DEALERS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA (ENFORCEMENT DIVISION) AND CHARLES KAMAL DASS
IN THE MATTER OF THE INVESTMENT DEALERS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA (ENFORCEMENT DIVISION) AND CHARLES KAMAL DASS DISCIPLINARY HEARING OF THE PACIFIC DISTRICT COUNCIL OF THE INVESTMENT DEALERS ASSOCIATION OF
More informationANTI-BRIBERY POLICY. 1. Purpose
ANTI-BRIBERY POLICY 1. Purpose The purpose of this policy is to establish controls to ensure compliance with all applicable anti-bribery and corruption regulations, and to ensure that the Company s business
More informationDisciplinary Procedure
Disciplinary Procedure The Executive of the IST shall have the authority to invoke the disciplinary procedure for any member of the Institute whose conduct is alleged to be in breach of the IST's Code
More informationDECISION REGARDING PENALTY. DATE AND PLACE OF HEARING: April 9, 2018 Office of the Real Estate Council Vancouver
File 14-431 IN THE MATTER OF THE REAL ESTATE SERVICES ACT S.B.C. 2004, c. 42 as amended AND IN THE MATTER OF SHAHIN BEHROYAN AND SHAHIN BEHROYAN PERSONAL REAL ESTATE CORPORATION DECISION REGARDING PENALTY
More informationAMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION STANDARDS FOR IMPOSING LAWYER SANCTIONS
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION STANDARDS FOR IMPOSING LAWYER SANCTIONS Definitions Adopted by the Michigan Supreme Court in Grievance Administrator v Lopatin, 462 Mich 235, 238 n 1 (2000) Injury is harm to a
More informationIIROC Registration The Fit and Proper Test for Approved Persons
Administrative General Please distribute internally to: Legal and Compliance Registration Contact: Rossana Di Lieto Vice-President, Registrations and Complaints (416) 943-6911 rdilieto@iiroc.ca 09-0192
More informationDirector of Customer Care & Performance. 26 April The Board is asked to consider and approve the attached draft
To: From: Subject: Status: Date of Meeting: BSO Board Director of Customer Care & Performance Anti Bribery Policy For Approval 26 April 2012 The Board is asked to consider and approve the attached draft
More informationIndependent review of the Financial Reporting Council s enforcement procedures sanctions
Independent review of the Financial Reporting Council s enforcement procedures sanctions Review Panel s call for submissions Comments from June 2017 (the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants)
More informationLittle Rascals Pre-school Anti-Bribery Policy
Little Rascals Pre-school Anti-Bribery Policy Purpose The purpose of this policy is to establish controls to ensure compliance with all applicable antibribery and corruption regulations, and to ensure
More informationDISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TRADES
Reasons for Decision File No.: DC201604 DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TRADES IN THE MATTER OF the Ontario College of Trades and Apprenticeship Act, 2009, (the Act and Ontario Regulation
More informationDISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE COLLEGE OF REGISTERED PSYCHOTHERAPISTS AND REGISTERED MENTAL HEALTH THERAPISTS OF ONTARIO
DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE COLLEGE OF REGISTERED PSYCHOTHERAPISTS AND REGISTERED MENTAL HEALTH THERAPISTS OF ONTARIO IN THE MATTER OF the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, S.O. 1991, c. 18, as amended,
More informationIN THE MATTER OF THE SECURITIES ACT, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.5 AS AMENDED AND IN THE MATTER OF JAIME ARLINDO VILAS-BOAS DIRECTOR S DECISION
IN THE MATTER OF THE SECURITIES ACT, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.5 AS AMENDED AND IN THE MATTER OF JAIME ARLINDO VILAS-BOAS DIRECTOR S DECISION Background 1. From October 8, 1998 to December 14, 2000, Jaime Arlindo
More informationREGULATIONS FOR FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION DISCIPLINARY ACTION
DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES - REGULATIONS 2015-2016 319 REGULATIONS FOR FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION DISCIPLINARY ACTION 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 These Regulations set out the way in which proceedings under Rules E and
More information2012 BCSECCOM 195. Canada Pacific Consulting Inc. and Michael Robert Shantz. Securities Act, RSBC 1996, c Hearing
Canada Pacific Consulting Inc. and Michael Robert Shantz Securities Act, RSBC 1996, c. 418 Hearing Panel Brent W. Aitken Vice Chair Kenneth G. Hanna Commissioner David J. Smith Commissioner Submissions
More informationSanctions Policy Guidance to RICS Disciplinary, Registration and Appeal Panel Rules
Regulation Sanctions Policy Guidance to RICS Disciplinary, Registration and Appeal Panel Rules 01 January 2008 Version 7 with effect from 01 January 2017 rics.org/regulation Sanctions Policy Part A Introduction
More informationPROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS REGISTRATION ACT
PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS REGISTRATION ACT Chapter P-26 Table of Contents Part 1 Registration 1 Definitions 2 Staff 3 Registrar 4 Register 5 Ineligibility for registration 6 Application
More informationBEFORE THE NATIONAL ADJUDICATORY COUNCIL NASD REGULATION, INC.
BEFORE THE NATIONAL ADJUDICATORY COUNCIL NASD REGULATION, INC. In the Matter of Department of Enforcement, vs. Complainant, James Henry Bond, III New York, NY, DECISION Complaint No. C10000210 Dated: April
More informationIN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT, 1990 AND IN THE MATTER OF William Zion Brown, of La Ronge, Saskatchewan, A LAWYER
CANADA ) ) PROVINCE OF SASKATCHEWAN ) ) TO WIT: ) IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT, 1990 AND IN THE MATTER OF William Zion Brown, of La Ronge, Saskatchewan, A LAWYER The Law Society of Saskatchewan
More informationNotice to Members. NASD Releases Minor Rule Violation Plan (MRVP) Guidelines. Executive Summary. Questions/Further Information
Notice to Members MARCH 2004 SUGGESTED ROUTING Legal & Compliance Registered Representatives Senior Management GUIDANCE NASD Releases Minor Rule Violation Plan (MRVP) Guidelines KEY TOPICS Minor Rule Violation
More informationANTI-BRIBERY & CORRUPTION POLICY
GABRIEL RESOURCES LIMITED ANTI-BRIBERY & CORRUPTION POLICY 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 The Board of Directors of Gabriel Resources Ltd. 1 (the Company or "Gabriel") has determined that, on the recommendation of
More informationREASONS FOR DECISION
Reasons for Decision File No. 201138 IN THE MATTER OF A SETTLEMENT HEARING PURSUANT TO SECTION 24.4 OF BY-LAW NO. 1 OF THE MUTUAL FUND DEALERS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA Re: Jade Truman Kaiser Mason Heard:
More informationRe Laroche. The Dealer Member Rules of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC)
Unofficial English Translation IN THE MATTER OF: Re Laroche The Dealer Member Rules of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC) and The By-Laws of the Investment Dealers Association
More informationThe Law Society of British Columbia In the matter of the Legal Profession Act, SBC 1998, c.9 and a hearing concerning. James Douglas Hall.
2007 LSBC 26 Report issued: May 28, 2007 Citation issued: December 1, 2005 The Law Society of British Columbia In the matter of the Legal Profession Act, SBC 1998, c.9 and a hearing concerning James Douglas
More informationANTI-BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION POLICY UK ENGINEERING RECRUITMENT LTD
Page 1 of 5 Contents: ANTI-BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION POLICY 1. Definitions 2. Introduction 3. Purpose and scope of this policy 4. The Bribery Act 2010 5. The risks of not acting with integrity 6. The benefits
More informationGuidance for the Practice Committees including Indicative Sanctions Guidance
Guidance for the Practice Committees including Indicative Sanctions Guidance Effective 1 st October 2016 1 2 Contents 1 Introduction and background... 4 2 The Professional Conduct Committee (PCC)... 5
More informationANTI-CORRUPTION AND BRIBERY POLICY
ANTI-CORRUPTION AND BRIBERY POLICY Date Approved by Governors March 2017 Review Date March 2019 On behalf of Governors signed Print name On behalf of Governors signed Print name Principal s signature All
More informationANTI-CORRUPTION & BRIBERY
Page 1 of 11 ANTI-CORRUPTION & BRIBERY Page 2 of 11 CONTENTS CLAUSE 1. Policy statement... 3 2. Who is covered by the policy?... 4 3. What is bribery?... 4 4. Gifts and hospitality... 5 5. What is not
More informationTHE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT
THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT IN THE MATTER OF THE Legal Profession Act R.S.A. 2000, C. L-8, and in the matter of a Hearing regarding the conduct of Thomas Pontin, a Member of the
More informationIn accordance with Rule 41 of the General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules 2004 the hearing was held in public.
PUBLIC RECORD Dates: 27/11/2018-29/11/2018 Medical Practitioner s name: Dr Stamatios OIKONOMOU GMC reference number: 6072884 Primary medical qualification: Type of case New - Misconduct Ptychio Iatrikes
More informationAllen Berenbaum: Summary, as Published in CheckMark
Allen Berenbaum: Summary, as Published in CheckMark Michael Larry Bank, of Thornhill, Allen Berenbaum, of Toronto, and Ronald Torch, of Thornhill, were each found guilty of a charge under Rule 201.1 of
More informationNursing and Midwifery Council: Fitness to Practise Committee
Nursing and Midwifery Council Fitness to Practise Committee Substantive Hearing Friday, 5 January 2018 Nursing and Midwifery Council, 61 Aldwych, London WC2B 4AE Name of registrant: NMC PIN: Mr Razvan
More informationThis Policy sets out Sewtec s position on any form of bribery and corruption and provides guidelines aimed at:
ANTI-BRIBERY & CORRUPTION POLICY Introduction Sewtec Automation Limited ( The Company ) is committed to promoting and maintaining the highest level of ethical standards in relation to all of its business
More informationNotice of Decision of the Northern Ireland Social Care Council s Conduct Committee
Notice of Decision of the Northern Ireland Social Care Council s Conduct Committee Name: Paula Curran Registration No: 2002171 Date: 30 January 2013 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the Conduct Committee of
More informationGuidelines for making a complaint about the conduct of a member of the Institution of Civil Engineers
Guidelines for making a complaint about the conduct of a member of the Institution of Civil Engineers This contains advice to members of the public, members of the Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE)
More informationFIA INSTITUTE ANTI BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION POLICY
! FIA INSTITUTE ANTI BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION POLICY 1. POLICY STATEMENT 1.1 As indicated in Article 8 of the Internal Regulations of the FIA Institute, we take a zero tolerance approach to bribery and corruption
More informationIN THE MATTER of the Certified Management Accountants Act, 2010, Statutes of Ontario 2010, C.6, Schedule B;
IN THE MATTER of the Certified Management Accountants Act, 2010, Statutes of Ontario 2010, C.6, Schedule B; AND IN THE MATTER of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, Revised Statutes of Ontario 1990, c.s.22,
More informationSOUTH AFRICAN RUGBY UNION DISCIPLINARY AND JUDICIAL MATTERS REGULATIONS
SOUTH AFRICAN RUGBY UNION DISCIPLINARY AND JUDICIAL MATTERS REGULATIONS 1 Definitions For the purposes of these Regulations the terms below shall have the following meanings assigned to them unless the
More informationGLOBAL NEW CAR ASSESSMENT PORGRAMME ANTI BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION POLICY [DRAFT]
GLOBAL NEW CAR ASSESSMENT PORGRAMME ANTI BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION POLICY [DRAFT] 1. POLICY STATEMENT 1.1 We take a zero tolerance approach to bribery and corruption and will uphold all laws relevant to countering
More informationFuneral Planning Authority Rules
Funeral Planning Authority Rules 1. GENERAL 1.1 Interpretation In these Rules: "Appellant" means the party serving a Disciplinary Appeal Notice in accordance with Rule 7.9.1; "Applicant" means a person
More informationHEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC
HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC BANNATYNE, Ashleigh Registration No: 214342 PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE JUNE 2017 - JUNE 2018* Most recent outcome: Suspension extended for 12 months (with a review) *See page
More informationSanctions Policy (Audit Enforcement Procedure)
Policy Financial Reporting Council April 2018 Sanctions Policy (Audit Enforcement Procedure) The FRC s mission is to promote transparency and integrity in business. The FRC sets the UK Corporate Governance
More information1 As at 1 September 2016 Rule 500-1
RULE 500 DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS DISCIPLINARY POWERS Rule 501 General Rule 501.1 In this Rule 500, disciplinary proceedings where the context permits includes appeal proceedings under Rule 515. Rule 501.2
More informationConsolidated Rules and UMIR, Dealer Member Rule, Transitional Rule and General By-law Equivalents
s and UMIR, Dealer Member Rule, Transitional Rule and General By-law Equivalents 1. The following consolidated Rules are introduced, and the equivalent UMIR, Dealer Member Rule, Transitional Rule and General
More informationACT. No Sierra Leone. Supplement to the Sierra Leone Gazette Vol. CXXXVIII, No. 23 dated 17th May, SIGNED this 11th day of May, 2007
ACT Supplement to the Sierra Leone Gazette Vol. CXXXVIII, No. 23 dated 17th May, 2007 SIGNED this 11th day of May, 2007 ALHAJI AHMAD TEJAN KABBAH, President. LS No. 4 2007 Sierra Leone The Other Financial
More informationOBJECTS AND REASONS. Arrangement of Sections PART I. Preliminary PART II. Licensing Requirements for International Service Providers
1 OBJECTS AND REASONS This Bill would provide for the regulation of the providers of international corporate and trust services and for related matters. Section 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation. 3. Application
More informationPOLICY: ANTI-CORRUPTION & ANTI-BRIBERY. Objective. Scope & Applicability. Definitions / Abbreviations. Content. What is bribery?
POLICY: ANTI-CORRUPTION & ANTI-BRIBERY Objective The objective of this policy is to: set out our responsibilities, and of those working for us, in observing and upholding our position on bribery and corruption
More information8.2.1 The definitions set out in these Regulations shall have the following meanings:
RFU REGULATION 8 AGENTS 8.1 Purpose of the Regulations 8.1.1 The purpose of these Regulations is to create a regulatory framework to help ensure a minimum level of standard and quality control in the activities
More informationSchedule Six Discipline Code
Schedule Six Discipline Code 1. Introduction This Code provides guidance on the standards of behaviour expected at all times of members of the University of Stirling Students Union, hereinafter referred
More informationHEARING PARTLY HEARD IN PRIVATE*
HEARING PARTLY HEARD IN PRIVATE* *The Committee has made a determination in this case that includes some private information. That information has been omitted from this text. GRAHAM, Lisa Marie Registration
More informationIN THE MATTER of the Certified Management Accountants Act, 2010, Statutes of Ontario 2010, C.6, Schedule B;
IN THE MATTER of the Certified Management Accountants Act, 2010, Statutes of Ontario 2010, C.6, Schedule B; AND IN THE MATTER of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, Revised Statutes of Ontario 1990, c.s.22,
More informationDISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE COLLEGE OF EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATORS
DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE COLLEGE OF EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATORS Citation: College of Early Childhood Educators vs Daniel Capstick, 2013 ONCECE 8 Date: 2013-09-19 IN THE MATTER OF the Early Childhood Educators
More information