Where a health professions college collects information about a registrant for “quality assurance” purposes, and the information includes feedback about the registrant’s performance from colleagues and patients, the information is not accessible by the registrant under freedom of information law.…
Complainants who file complaints with colleges against health professionals, and have their complaints dismissed, sometimes choose not to proceed with the Health Professions Review Board and instead commence civil action against the college and the health professional. The exclusive jurisdiction…
In 2018, courts addressed the boundaries of professional regulatory bodies to act in the public interest. First, courts examined limits on the powers of regulatory bodies, involving both registrants and non-registrants, relating to fundamental freedoms of religion and speech. Second, courts…
The B.C. Supreme Court recently confirmed that the Health Professions Review Board must afford deference to registrars and inquiry committees, when reviewing for adequacy of investigation, and that more specifically, the Review Board may not apply different degrees of deference,…
When inquiry committees negotiate consent or undertaking agreements to resolve complaint matters consensually (under Health Professions Act ss. 33(6)(c) and 36(1)), they may exchange “without prejudice” letters with registrants to discuss terms. In 2009, the Review Board seemingly eliminated “settlement…