HPRB Summaries: No review jurisdiction over decisions under statutes preceding the HPA

The Health Professions Review Board has jurisdiction to review specific decisions enumerated under s. 50.53(1) of the Health Professions Act, but not decisions under predecessor statutes, such as the Medical Practitioners Act. This limit on the Review Board’s jurisdiction is illustrated in The Complainant and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of B.C. and a Physician (February 5, 2010), HPRB Decision NO. 2009-HPA-0028(a).

This application was dismissed pursuant to s. 31(1)(a) of the ATA, as the Board did not have jurisdiction over the matter.

In that matter, a complainant filed a complaint about a registrant’s conduct, and the Deputy Registrar of the College decided, between May 26 and 29, 2009, the conduct was reasonable under the Medical Practitioners Act. On June 1, 2009, the MPA was repealed, and the College came under the Health Professions Act. The College communicated the decision to the complainant by a letter dated June 25, 2009. The complainant applied to the Review Board for a review on July 26, 2009.

The Board decided the effective date of the decision was June 25, 2009, the date of the letter communicating the decision, and not when the Deputy Registrar dictated the decision at the end of May. To rule otherwise would be to make the parties unable to comply with a decision and to render time calculations for review systems impossible. The effective date of the decision did not, however, determine the legislation under which the decision was made. The decision was in pith and substance a decision under the MPA, and not a decision under s. 32, 33(6) or 37.1 of the HPA. The Deputy Registrar did not return to the decision once it had been dictated. The time taken for the decision to be typed and released did not change the legal basis of the decision.

The Complainant and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of B.C. and a Physician (February 5, 2010), HPRB Decision No. 2009-HPA-0028(a).