|
RHPA - Educational Measures. Elgamal v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario
In Elgamal v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (Ont Div Ct, 2026) the Ontario Divisional Court dismissed a JR, this brought against "the decision of the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee (ICRC) of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario" which "required that the applicant undergo a specified continuing education or remediation program (a SCERP)".
Here the court considers the applicant's argument that the SCERP requirements were "impossible to complete":[25] The applicant’s submissions are mainly premised on his position that the ICRC knew that the SCERP was impossible to complete because it was highly unlikely that the applicant could obtain hospital privileges. I do not accept this criticism of the ICRC Decision.
[26] The ICRC was obliged to consider the investigation before it and the concerns raised about the applicant’s surgery practice.
[27] Further, the applicant told the ICRC that he wanted to resume a general surgery practice. To do so, the applicant would have to obtain hospital privileges. He could have agreed to restrict his practice. He declined to do so.
[28] While the requirement of a period of supervision would require hospital privileges, which could be difficult to obtain, this is secondary to the overarching goal of protecting the public by ensuring patient safety. The SCERP was tailored to and rationally connected to the ICRC’s concerns, as it should be: Zaki v Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons, 2017 ONSC 1613 (Div. Ct.), at paras. 36-38.
[29] Further, the SCERP itself indicated that the applicant could seek assistance from the College to complete the SCERP. If there was a problem obtaining the needed hospital privileges, the applicant had that route to pursue and has not done so.
[30] The applicant has not shown that the ICRC wrongly required a SCERP knowing that it was impossible to complete.
....
[36] This Court has repeatedly held that a SCERP is not punitive. The ICRC investigates complaints and other reports to the College, and determines if they merit a referral to discipline or can be dealt with in a less intrusive manner: Gill v. Health Professions Appeal and Review Board, 2024 ONSC 2588 (Div. Ct.), at para. 61. A SCERP is educational and remedial in nature and does not reflect a finding of professional misconduct.
[37] It is within the expertise of the ICRC to determine the degree of its concerns with the applicant’s practice, and to determine the level of educational intervention required given those concerns: Dr. Luay Ali Al-Kazely v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, 2022 ONSC 44 (Div. Ct.), at para. 70.
....
[41] The applicant’s second issue begins with his position that the SCERP was impossible. The applicant submits that the SCERP is therefore a de facto restriction on his licence, which cannot be imposed by the ICRC. The applicant submits that it would require a referral to discipline and finding of the Discipline Committee. Since the premise to this ground has not been shown, I need not consider the issue any further.
|
