In the recent case of College of Chiropractors of British Columbia v. Health Professions Review Board, 2016 BCSC 391, the B.C. Supreme Court addressed the duties of an inquiry committee
under the Health Professions Act, when a complainant asserts injury...
The HPRB as a party on judicial review: On judicial review, the registrant and the complainant were not in attendance, but the Review Board sought to be heard on the Court's role in a judicial review in cases
under Health Professions Act.
In the recent case of College of Chiropractors of British Columbia v. Health Professions Review Board, 2016 BCSC 391, the B.C. Supreme Court addressed the duties of an inquiry committee
under the Health Professions Act, when a complainant asserts injury caused by alleged negligence, but the committee dismisses the complaint based on the treatment having been appropriate, regardless of evidence from other health professionals bearing on whether the treatment caused the injury.
Thus, they argued that their employer had a duty to accommodate such that a modified disciplinary procedure was required
under the Health Professions Act, RSA 2000, c H - 7 («HPA»).
Lorna, as chair of the Inquiry Committee of CMTBC, chairs panels under section 35 of the Health Professions Act and meetings of the Inquiry Committee which is charged with investigations
under the Health Professions Act and Massage Therapists Regulation.
For example,
under the Health Professions Act, Inquiry Committees have an express mandate to investigate matters, and can obtain court assistance to obtain relevant evidence from non-parties (HPA s. 29), whereas registration committees do not.
In Ontario, a health professional who commits «sexual abuse» in certain specific ways, such as through sexual intercourse, must have his licence to practice revoked, and is not eligible to reapply for five years,
under the Health Professions Procedural Code.
«Medical Practitioner» is defined at section 29 of the BC Interpretation Act as «a registrant of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia entitled
under the Health Professions Act to practice medicine and to use the title «medical practitioner».»
Under the Health Professions Regulatory Bodies Act 2013, Act 857, the punishment for practising medicine without licence is a minimum fine of not less than GH cents 12, 000 and not more than Gh cents 120,000 or an imprisonment term of not more than 20 years or both.
Not exact matches
It puts certified professional midwives up to the same standards that all
health professions are
under through licensing boards.
This funding reflects our commitment to reducing barriers to our
profession in the UK, supporting aspiring IBCLCs, especially those who are not
health professionals, and those from groups which are
under - represented, thus encouraging greater... Read More
With a month and a half left in the second open enrollment period
under the Affordable Care Act,
professions who help connect New Yorkers with insurance see a change in how individuals approach
health coverage this year.
Even though these summer opportunities help students prepare for careers in the
health professions, they are by no means a prerequisite, and
under the circumstances, not having one is an unavoidable consequence of the Katrina tragedy.
The qualifications and training standards for
health or wellness coaches, as well as their skills and competencies, are
under debate although some initiatives are underway to develop national standards and certifications to legitimize this
profession.
Yes, N.D.'s are regulated in Ontario
under the 1991 Regulated
Health Professions Act and are licensed by the College of Naturopaths of Ontario (CONO).
We can't continually expect the teaching
profession to deliver record breaking results when we are seeing record breaking levels of mental ill -
health problems due to the pressures they are being placed
under.
If you want to career in a
health profession, or as a teacher, there are special loan repayment programs and scholarships available for people who want to work in an
under - served area.
As we state in the book, we're
under no illusion that a pavlova will end mental
health issues or even the shocking suicide rate in our
profession.
They developed a romantic and sexual relationship, and engaged in consensual sexual contact six days after the pharmacist filled a prescription for Ms. W.
Under the Ontario Regulated
Health Professions Act, 1991, S.O. 1991, c. 18, and its Schedule 2, the Health Professions Procedural Code (the «Code»), a health professional who commits sexual misconduct by sexual abusing a patient (in certain specific ways) is subject to mandatory revocation and can not apply for reinstatement for five years (Co
Health Professions Act, 1991, S.O. 1991, c. 18, and its Schedule 2, the
Health Professions Procedural Code (the «Code»), a health professional who commits sexual misconduct by sexual abusing a patient (in certain specific ways) is subject to mandatory revocation and can not apply for reinstatement for five years (Co
Health Professions Procedural Code (the «Code»), a
health professional who commits sexual misconduct by sexual abusing a patient (in certain specific ways) is subject to mandatory revocation and can not apply for reinstatement for five years (Co
health professional who commits sexual misconduct by sexual abusing a patient (in certain specific ways) is subject to mandatory revocation and can not apply for reinstatement for five years (Code ss.
This is the proposal that decisions relating to a healthcare professional's
health, made by the OHPA or the relevant committees of the other healthcare regulators, should be subject to the Council for Healthcare Regulatory Excellence's power to refer to the High Court
under s 29 of the NHS Reform and Healthcare
Professions Act 2002 (pending the GMC receiving powers to bring its own appeals against decisions of the OHPA).
Where an inquiry committee of a college
under the BC
Health Professions Act summarily dismisses a complaint, on the basis the college lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter of the complaint (e.g., a financial dispute between the parties), the
Health...
This question arises
under BC's
Health Professions Act, when any inquiry committee may take action «necessary to protect the public» (section 35), but registrants may demand that the committee weigh evidence of their «innocence» as part of their decision - making.
Where, for example, a registrant or member suffers from an alcohol or drug addiction, a regulator must accommodate that disability to the point of undue hardship when addressing professional misconduct resulting from that disability, or when addressing the registrant's competence, or when acting
under any provision relating specifically to addictions that may impair the professional's ability to practice, e.g.,
under sections 33 (4)(e) and 39 (1)(e) of the
Health Professions Act.
Join Lindsay Kantor on May 14th in Toronto at the OBA's Professional Development Program on Advanced Issues in Professional Regulation, where she will speak on the topic of Exploring New Interim Suspension Powers
under the Regulated
Health Professions Act alongside Shenda Tanchak, Registrar and CEO, of the College of Physiotherapists.
This question arises
under BC's
Health Professions Act, when any inquiry committee may take action «necessary to...
Additional protection arises from the BC
Health Professions Act, and the Ontario Registered
Health Professions Act, preventing personnel from being compelled to give evidence in judicial proceedings, and prevents related records from being compellable in judicial proceedings (except proceedings
under the HPA or RHPA).
«original provider» means, in respect of an insured person, the member of a
health profession who, in accordance with this Regulation, approved the treatment plan, prepared the assessment of attendant care needs, completed the disability certificate or prepared the application
under section 40, as applicable, that was submitted to the insurer with respect to the insured person.
Awards made
under these heads of damages will vary depending on the severity and duration of your injuries, but factors like your age,
profession, income, and your
health before the accident are all likely to impact the value of your claim.
The consultation must be arranged by mutual agreement of the person who is conducting or has conducted the examination
under section 42 and the
health practitioner or member of the
health profession involved in the consultation.
the member of the
health profession who prepared the assessment of attendant care needs, if the examination relates to an application
under section 39, or
(5) The assessment or examination
under this section may be conducted by any person who is a member of any
health profession if,
(13) A member of a
health profession who receives a document
under the authority of subsection (2.1) shall immediately notify the insured person by telephone of the substance of the document and send a copy of the document to the insured person by ordinary mail or fax.
(b) a member of a
health profession who is a
health practitioner if the document is a notice
under subsection 37.1 (4) or (5).
Under B.C.'s
Health Professions Act, an inquiry committee has a power, based on provisional findings, to «take any action it considers appropriate» to resolve the matter between a complainant and a respondent: HPA s. 33 (6)(b).
(4) Every member of a
health profession and social worker who refers an insured person to another person to obtain goods or services in respect of which a medical or rehabilitation benefits will be paid by an insurer
under this section shall give the insurer and the insured person written notice disclosing any conflict of interest the member of the
health profession or social worker has relating to the provision of the goods or services.
Reasonable fees charged by a member of a
health profession for preparing an assessment of attendant care needs
under section 39.
(a) the original provider is not a member of the same
health profession as the person who conducted the examination
under section 42; or
38.2 (1) This section applies to an application prepared by a member of a
health profession or social worker for approval of an assessment or examination of an insured person if the application is not submitted as part of a treatment plan
under section 38.
In Stelmaschuk, a court found extraordinary action
under the BC
Health Professions Act to be invalid where a regulator could not establish an urgency that would justify a lack of sufficient notice to a registrant as to the issues an Inquiry Committee would be considering, i.e., interim conditions versus an interim suspension, or a lack of opportunity for the registrant to make submissions: Stelmaschuk v.
(11) Within five business days after receiving the report of an examination
under section 42, the insurer shall give a copy of the report and the insurer's determination with respect to the benefit to the insured person and to the member of the
health profession who prepared the assessment of attendant care needs.
(6) If members of two or more
health professions conducted the examination
under section 42, the assessment or examination
under this section may be conducted by one or more persons other than the original provider.
(3) An examination
under this section shall be conducted by one or more members of one or more
health professions who are chosen by the insurer.
(14) An insurer shall not deliver documents to a member of a
health profession in reliance on an authorization
under subsection (2.2) unless the documents are expressly specified in the authorization referred to in that subsection.
(a) a member of a
health profession if the document is a notice
under subsection 38 (5) or (8), 38.2 (4) or (6) or 42 (4) or a report prepared
under section 42; or
First, some or all of the documents may be «confidential», e.g.,
under the common law, or
under a statutory provision like section 53 of the B.C.
Health Professions Act.
The
Health Professions Review Board summarily dismissed the registration review on the basis the complainant was not an «applicant» for registration
under s. 50.53 (1)(a) of the HPA.
(For
health professions, this issue has been highlighted in recent months by the question of what the Health Professions Review Board can do with respect to information released to a complainant as part of the «record» of a decision under r
health professions, this issue has been highlighted in recent months by the question of what the Health Professions Review Board can do with respect to information released to a complainant as part of the «record» of a decision un
professions, this issue has been highlighted in recent months by the question of what the
Health Professions Review Board can do with respect to information released to a complainant as part of the «record» of a decision under r
Health Professions Review Board can do with respect to information released to a complainant as part of the «record» of a decision un
Professions Review Board can do with respect to information released to a complainant as part of the «record» of a decision
under review.
For example, section 53 of BC's
Health Professions Act not only imposes a duty on persons to «preserve confidentiality», but also provides that records are «not compellable in an court or in proceedings of a judicial nature» except for proceedings
under the Act, or where disclosure is authorized by a college board as «being in the public interest» (s. 53 (1) and (3)-RRB-.
But the courts struck out his mention of her recantation in his defence, on the basis the complainant's statement was inadmissible in the court action, due to section 36 (3) of Regulated
Health Professions Act stipulating that no document prepared for a proceeding
under the Act was admissible in a civil proceeding.
Under s. 76 of the Health Professions Procedural Code (which is Schedule 2 of the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, SO 1991, c. 18), a College investigator has a power (under Part II of the Public Inquiries Act) to «inquire into and examine the practice of the member» and for that purpose may issue, without court authorization, a summons to require a person to give or produce relevant evidence to the investig
Under s. 76 of the
Health Professions Procedural Code (which is Schedule 2 of the Regulated
Health Professions Act, 1991, SO 1991, c. 18), a College investigator has a power (
under Part II of the Public Inquiries Act) to «inquire into and examine the practice of the member» and for that purpose may issue, without court authorization, a summons to require a person to give or produce relevant evidence to the investig
under Part II of the Public Inquiries Act) to «inquire into and examine the practice of the member» and for that purpose may issue, without court authorization, a summons to require a person to give or produce relevant evidence to the investigator.