A Cautionary Tale: Admissions Against Interest In Regulatory And Subsequent Criminal Proceedings

A recent decision from the Ontario Court of Appeal serves as a cautionary tale for regulated professionals and their counsel considering the terms of a potential resolution of discipline proceedings where related criminal proceedings may still be on the horizon. In R v Lo, the Court of Appeal upheld a trial judge's decision during a criminal jury trial to admit into evidence the Agreed Statement of Fact ("ASF") from a prior disciplinary hearing on related allegations before the College of Psychiatrists ("CPO").

The Court of Appeal held that the ASF was a formal admission in the CPO hearing, which the CPO had relied upon as proof of the underlying facts alleged. Justice Watt, writing for a unanimous panel, reasoned that the ASF was properly admissible against the accused in a subsequent criminal trial as an admission against interest. He also provides a helpful summary of the law of evidence with respect to admissions.