Skip to content

Professionally speaking: Ontario Superior Court upholds professional regulators’ right to moderate speech

By Sheila Mecking and Kathleen Starke

On August 23, 2023, the Ontario Superior Court (“ONSC”) upheld a complaints decision which ordered a psychologist to complete a continuing education or remedial program regarding professionalism in public statements.[1]  The Court’s decision confirms that professional regulators have authority to regulate public statements of their members and that high standards are imposed on professionals’ conduct, off-duty or otherwise.

Background and decision

The complaints decision stemmed from multiple complaints to the College of Psychologists of Ontario against Dr. Peterson for tweets and his statements made on a podcast – Dr. Peterson disparaged a former client who filed complaints against him, and made other derogatory, sexist, transphobic, and racist comments that were not in keeping with any clinical understanding of mental health. The College’s Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee found: “[the comments] may be reasonably regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable and/or unprofessional” and posed “moderate risks of harm to the public.  The Committee ordered Dr. Peterson to complete a specified continuing education or remedial program regarding professionalism in public statements.

Upon appeal to the ONSC, Dr. Peterson argued, in part, that the College’s Code of Ethics did not apply to “off duty” comments and it was only applicable to comments made in his professional capacity.  However, the ONSC did not agree, and found that Dr. Peterson’s comments were not made as a private citizen, but instead as a psychologist representing his profession.[2]

Further, the ONSC recognized that professionals can harm public trust and confidence in the profession through “off-duty” conduct.  Therefore, regulatory bodies have the authority to ensure that professionals are abiding by applicable standards of conduct, including conduct “off-duty”.

Key takeaways

  1. A professional may find their Charter rights impaired as professional regulators balance Charter rights, such as freedom of expression, against the interest of the public.[3]
  2. Regulated professionals should think twice about posting personal opinions on public platforms and how such statements could impact their profession and the public more broadly.
  3. Harmful public statements constitute professional misconduct and/or conduct unbecoming. The motivation or true intent behind the comments is not relevant – what is relevant, is the language used and the impact of that language.
  4. Professional regulators must issue decisions that are transparent, intelligible, justifiable, and reasonable, and this onus is a heightened when the decision could affect a members’ Charter rights.

This client update is provided for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. If you have any questions about the above, please contact a member of our Professional Regulation & Misconduct group.

Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.


[1] Peterson v College of Psychologists of Ontario, 2023 ONSC 4685.
[2] The ONSC further held that Dr. Peterson’s own actions undermined his argument, including that he identified himself on Twitter as a “clinical psychologist” and, in fact, relied on his professional status to lend credibility to his statements.
[3] The ONSC held that the complaints decision minimally impaired, if at all, Dr. Peterson’s freedom of expression rights given that Dr. Peterson had ignored previous advice regarding his use of demeaning language.  Therefore, it was an appropriate next step to order Dr. Peterson to undertake coaching with respect to his language.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Let’s talk about batteries: Nova Scotia Power’s latest development in renewable energy

July 18, 2024

In conjunction with our upcoming sponsorship of the Halifax Chamber of Commerce luncheon, featuring the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources the Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson, we are pleased to present a Thought Leadership article highlighting…

Read More

“Sale” away: The SCC’s more flexible approach to exclusion clauses in contracts for the sale of goods

July 9, 2024

By Jennifer Taylor & Marina Luro A recent Supreme Court of Canada decision has clarified how to interpret exclusion clauses in sale of goods contracts. The Court in Earthco Soil Mixtures Inc. v Pine Valley…

Read More

Recent case re-confirms temporary ailment is not a disability

June 24, 2024

By Mark Tector and Tiegan A. Scott Decision On April 3, 2024, the Alberta Court of King’s Bench (“ABKB”) upheld a decision of the Chief of the Commissions and Tribunals (the “CCT Decision”), which held…

Read More

Compensation for expropriation: Fair, but not more than fair

June 17, 2024

By Erin Best, Stephen Penney, Robert Bradley, Megan Kieley1 and Elizabeth Fleet1 Expropriation is a live issue in Canadian courts. The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision to broaden the test for constructive expropriation in Annapolis…

Read More

Changes affecting federally regulated employers

June 10, 2024

By Killian McParland and Sophie Poulos There have been many changes in recent months affecting employers governed by federal labour and employment laws. In September 2024, Stewart McKelvey will be hosting a webinar to review…

Read More

Impending changes to Nova Scotia’s Workers’ Compensation Act – Gradual onset stress

June 4, 2024

By Mark Tector and Annie Gray What’s changing? Currently, workers’ compensation coverage in Nova Scotia applies to only a narrow subset of psychological injuries. Specifically, in Nova Scotia – as in all Atlantic Provinces –…

Read More

Appeal Courts uphold substantial costs awards for regulators

May 22, 2024

By Sean Kelly & Michiko Gartshore Professional regulators can incur substantial costs through discipline processes. These costs are often associated with investigations, hearings as well as committee member expenses and are an unfortunate by-product of…

Read More

Less than two weeks to go … Canada Supply Chain Transparency Reports are due May 31st

May 21, 2024

By Christine Pound, ICD.D., Twila Reid, ICD.D., Sarah Dever Letson, CIPP/C, Sheila Mecking, Hilary Newman, and Daniel Roth Introduction The first reports under the Fighting Against Forced Labour and Child Labour in Supply Chains Act (the…

Read More

Court upheld municipality’s refusal to disclose investigation report

May 1, 2024

By Sheila Mecking and Sarah Dever Letson A recent decision out of the Court of King’s Bench of New Brunswick,[1] upheld the Municipality of Tantramar’s decision to withhold a Workplace Assessment Report under section 20(1)…

Read More

Occupational Health and Safety sentencing decision – Nova Scotia

April 29, 2024

By Sean Kelly & Tiegan Scott Earlier this month, the Provincial Court of Nova Scotia issued its sentencing decision in R v The Brick Warehouse LP, 2024 NSPC 26, imposing a monetary penalty of $143,750 (i.e.,…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top