STAY OF EXECUTION NOT ALLOWED in BHULLAR V. BCVMA

The SCBC recently refused an application for a stay of execution imposed by the BCVMA. Dr. Bhullar lost his licence to practice because of many findings of unprofessional conduct. He has challenged the decision on judicial review raising jurisdictional issues. The Court refused his application because the findings on the charges of unprofessional conduct themselves suggested that a stay could not be granted because it was not in the public interest. Bhullar v. BCVMA

2010 BCSC 85

SCC NEW RULING ON THE CHARTER AND MATURE MINORS

The SCC recently considered the situation of a 16 year old devout Jehovah's Witness who gave an advance medical directive at age 15, not to be given blood under any circumstances in A.C. v. Manitoba (Director of Child and Family Services) 2009 SCC 30. She suffered from lower gastrointestinal bleeding caused by Crohn's disease. Her physician believed that the internal bleeding created imminent, serious risk to her health and that she required blood transfusions. The Director apprehended her and sought a Court Order authorizing treatment in accordance with her physician's recommendations. The patient and her parents opposed the application. The Manitoba legislation a presumption that where a child was age 16 or older, that child's views as to treatment were determinative unless it was shown that the child did not understand a decision or appreciate its consequences. Since this patient was under age 16, the presumption did not apply. The Court ordered the blood transfusions and this order was upheld on appeal. The parents and the patient argued that she was a mature minor so that her treatment decision ought to have been respected and that the Manitoba legislation infringed her rights under sections 2(a), 7 and 15 of the Charter. The majority judgment upheld the legislation.

INVESTIGATORS POWER INCLUDES POWER TO OBSERVE

In Gore v. College of Physicians & Surgeons (Ontario) 2008 O.J. No. 3757, several physicians who performed high risk cosmetic surgeries were investigated. In one case, the investigation commenced because a patient had died. The Court was asked to consider the scope of the power to investigate - in particular, whether it included the power to directly observe surgical procedures performed by the registrants under review. They argued that the investigators could not do so. The court dismissed the applications for review holding that the powers of investigators are wide ranging, particularly in light of the purpose of the applicable legislation to protect the public. The Court followed the Supreme Court of Canada in Pharmascience Inc v. Binet [2006] 2 S.C.R. 513m in which it held that: it should be expected that individuals with not only the power, but also the duty to inquire into a professional's conduct will have sufficiently effective means at their disposal to gather all information relevant to determining whether a complaint should be lodged. (paras. 36 - 37).