Dadoush v. College of Physicians and Surgeons (Sask.), (1996) 149 Sask.R. 128 (QB)

• Judge: Klebuc, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: October 08, 1996
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1996), 149 Sask.R. 128 (QB)

Dadoush v. College of Physicians (1996), 149 Sask.R. 128 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

In The Matter Of the Medical Profession Act, 1981;

And In The Matter Of Part 52 of the Queen's Bench Rules.

Dr. Saliba Dadoush (applicant) v. The Council of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan (respondent)

(1996 Q.B. No. 949)

Indexed As: Dadoush v. College of Physicians and Surgeons (Sask.)

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Saskatoon

Klebuc, J.

October 8, 1996.

Summary:

The Saskatchewan College of Physicians and Surgeons passed resolutions appointing a competency committee to investigate the professional skills and knowledge of a phy­sician and requiring the physician to attend before the Council of the College for an interview respecting matters the physician deposed to in an affidavit filed in court in another proceeding. The physician applied for judicial review seeking to quash the resolutions.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench allowed the application in part. The court refused to quash the order appointing the competency committee but quashed the order requiring the physician to attend the inter­view respecting the contents of the affidavit.

Libel and Slander - Topic 2928

Defences - Absolute privilege - State­ments made in the course of judicial or legal proceedings - Affidavits - [See Medicine - Topic 663 ].

Medicine - Topic 663

Governing bodies - Powers - Investigation - Scope of - The Saskatchewan College of Physicians and Surgeons passed a res­olution ordering a physician to attend before the Council of the College for an interview respecting matters the physician deposed to in an affidavit filed in court in another proceeding (i.e., allegations that the Council of the College had racist pol­icies) - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench issued an order quashing the resolution and prohibiting the Council from interviewing the physician respecting the contents of the affidavit - The court held that the material in the affidavit was subject to the doctrine of absolute privilege - See paragraphs 15 to 24.

Medicine - Topic 670

Governing bodies - Powers - Competency assessments - The Saskatchewan College of Physicians and Surgeons passed a re­solution appointing a competency commit­tee to investigate the professional skills and knowledge of a physician - The phy­sician sought to quash the resolution alleg­ing a reasonable apprehension of bias - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application to quash where the evidence fell short of establishing a reasonable apprehension of bias and the competency committee had investigatory powers only - See paragraphs 9 to 14.

Cases Noticed:

Sebastian v. Workers' Compensation Board (Sask.) (1994), 125 Sask.R. 28; 81 W.A.C. 28 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

Misra v. College of Physicians and Sur­geons (Sask.), [1988] 5 W.W.R. 333; 70 Sask.R. 116 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

Canada (Attorney General) v. Mossop, [1993] 1 S.C.R. 554; 149 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 8].

University of British Columbia v. Berg, [1993] 2 S.C.R. 353; 152 N.R. 99; 26 B.C.A.C. 241; 44 W.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 8].

Spence v. Spencer and Prince Albert Board of Police Commissioners (1987), 53 Sask.R. 35 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

Newfoundland Telephone Co. v. Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities (Nfld.), [1992] 1 S.C.R. 623; 134 N.R. 241; 95 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 271; 301 A.P.R. 271, refd to. [para. 10].

Committee for Justice and Liberty Foun­dation et al. v. National Energy Board et al., [1978] 1 S.C.R. 369; 9 N.R. 115, refd to. [para. 10].

Huerto v. College of Physicians and Sur­geons (Sask.) (1996), 141 Sask.R. 3; 114 W.A.C. 3 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].

Lambert v. College of Physicians and Surgeons (Sask.) (1992), 100 Sask.R. 203; 18 W.A.C. 203 (C.A.), affing. (1992), 101 Sask.R. 81 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 11].

French v. Law Society of Upper Canada (1974), 3 N.R. 410; 49 D.L.R.(3d) 1 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 11].

Fogel v. Minister of Manpower and Im­migration (1975), 7 N.R. 172 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 11].

Posluns v. Toronto Stock Exchange et al. (1968), 67 D.L.R.(2d) 165 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 11].

College of Physicians and Surgeons (Ont.) v. Petrie (1989), 32 O.A.C. 248; 37 Admin. L.R. 119 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 11].

Restrictive Trade Practices Commission et al. v. Irvine et al. (1987), 74 N.R. 33; 41 D.L.R.(4th) 429 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 12].

Degerness et al. v. Local Government Board (Sask.) et al. (1979), 104 D.L.R.(3d) 768 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 12].

Hawrish v. Cundall et al. (1989), 76 Sask.R. 208 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 12].

Cromer v. British Columbia Teachers' Federation et al. (1986), 29 D.L.R.(4th) 641 (B.C.C.A.), not appld. [para. 15].

Lazarenko, Re, [1984] 2 W.W.R. 24; 50 A.R. 337 (Q.B.), not appld. [para. 16].

Roncarelli v. Duplessis (1959), 16 D.L.R.(2d) 689 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 20].

Credit Foncier Franco-Canadien v. Canada (Board of Review Under Farmers' Credi­tors Arrangement Act, 1934) and Morri­son, [1939] 3 W.W.R. 632 (Sask. K.B.), refd to. [para. 21].

Bottomley v. Brougham, [1908] 1 K.B. 584, refd to. [para. 21].

Marrinan v. Vibart et al., [1963] 1 Q.B. 234, refd to. [para. 22].

Lincoln v. Daniels, [1962] 1 Q.B. 237 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

Razzell v. Edmonton Mint Ltd., Simons & Co. and Simons, [1981] 4 W.W.R. 5; 29 A.R. 285 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 22].

Dooley v. Weber (C.N.) Ltd. (1994), 118 D.L.R.(4th) 750 (Ont. Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 22].

Seaman v. Netherclift (1876), 2 C.P.D. 53 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

Counsel:

Lynne G. Greenhorn, for the applicant;

Bryan E. Salte, for the respondent.

This application was heard before Klebuc, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Saskatoon, who delivered the following judgment on October 8, 1996.