Simon's Legal Resources

(Ontario/Canada)

EVIDENCE | ADMINISTRATIVE LAW | SPPA / Fairness (Administrative)
SMALL CLAIMS / CIVIL LITIGATION / CIVIL APPEALS / JUDICIAL REVIEW / Something Big

Home / About / Democracy, Law and Duty / Testimonials / Conditions of Use

Civil and Administrative
Litigation Opinions
for Self-Reppers


TOPICS

(What's a Topic?)

Professionals (RHPA) - Ignorance of Rules No Excuse

. Aslam v Ontario College of Pharmacists

In Aslam v Ontario College of Pharmacists (Div Court, 2023) the Divisional Court held that a pharmacist's ignorance of the rules that governed his profession was no excuse:
Failing to report the criminal charges

[4] This ground can be readily dealt with. The appellant testified that he did not report the criminal proceedings because he did not know that he had to do so within 30 days of their institution. He thought that he had until his next annual filing, at which time he did report them. The Committee did not believe him. In any event, his explanation did not amount to a defence. It was his duty to know the rule. His omission amounts to professional misconduct.

CC0

Unless authorship is otherwise stated or obvious from the context, all
written materials in this website were created by Simon Shields, who
waives all of his copyright and related or neighboring rights to this
Isthatlegal.ca webpage. Note in particular that this waiver only applies to
Simon's material, as copyright in statutory/regulatory materials and
case extracts were never his to give away.




Last modified: 01-05-23
By: admin