Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 20 JUNE 2016

The Functus Officio Doctrine: Food For Regulatory Fodder

Consider the following hypothetical: The "Vetting Committee" of a professional regulator refers specified allegations of professional misconduct against a member to the Discipline Committee.

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Consider the following hypothetical: The "Vetting Committee"1 of a professional regulator refers specified allegations of professional misconduct against a member to the Discipline Committee. After the Notice of Hearing is signed, new information arises which would have likely influenced the referral itself. Is the Vetting Committee entitled to reconsider its own decision in light of the new information? Does the answer change if the new information is received after the referral is made but before the Notice of Hearing is signed? What if the new information would not have influenced the referral itself but rather would have impacted the Vetting Committee's decision to impose interim conditions?

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from