R. v. Windrum (P.), (1994) 126 Sask.R. 15 (QB)

• Judge: Barclay, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: October 20, 1994
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1994), 126 Sask.R. 15 (QB)

R. v. Windrum (P.) (1994), 126 Sask.R. 15 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Pat Windrum (appellant) v. Her Majesty The Queen (respondent)

(1993 Q.B.M. No. 860)

Indexed As: R. v. Windrum (P.)

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Regina

Barclay, J.

October 20, 1994.

Summary:

The accused was convicted of charges under the Medical Profession Act that he, not being registered and licensed under that Act, engaged in the practice of medicine for hire, gain or hope of reward, by diagnosing and treating a six year old girl. He was sentenced to pay a fine of $2,500 on each of two counts. The accused appealed the con­victions and sentence.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the appeal.

Evidence - Topic 3688

Documentary evidence - Private docu­ments - Photographs, movies, videotapes, etc. - Sound or tape recordings - The accused was convicted under the Medical Profession Act that he, not being registered and licensed under that Act, engaged in the practice of medicine for hire, gain or hope of reward - The accused had examined and diagnosed a child and recommended treatment - The examination had been tape recorded with the accused's knowledge and consent - The child's mother who had been present confirmed that the tape was the original, that it was accurate and com­plete and that the man's voice on the tape was the accused's - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench held that the trial judge properly admitted the recording - See paragraphs 19 to 20.

Medicine - Topic 6

General - Interpretation of legislation - [See first Medicine - Topic 1703 ].

Medicine - Topic 1703

Unauthorized practice - General - Mean­ing of practice of medicine - The accused was convicted of charges under the Medi­cal Profession Act that he, not being regis­tered and licensed under that Act, engaged in the practice of medicine for hire, gain or hope of reward, by diagnosing and treating a six year old girl - The accused argued that the Act should be strictly construed because the prime object of the Act was the protection of the monopoly of practis­ing medicine - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench held that in defining the practice of medicine, a strict interpretation must be placed on the wording of s. 79 of the Act - See paragraphs 22 to 33.

Medicine - Topic 1703

Unauthorized practice - General - Mean­ing of practice of medicine - The accused was convicted of charges under the Medi­cal Profession Act that he, not being regis­tered and licensed under that Act, engaged in the practice of medicine for hire, gain or hope of reward, by diagnosing and treating a six year old girl - The accused argued that the trial judge erred in finding that there was no evidence that the accused did not present himself as a doctor - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench held that whether the accused presented himself as a doctor was irrelevant and that in the final analysis the court was to determine whether the accused was practising medi­cine as defined by s. 79 of the Act - See paragraph 21.

Medicine - Topic 1703

Unauthorized practice - General - Mean­ing of practice of medicine - After ex­amining a child, the accused advised that she suffered from various maladies and recommended vitamins and other sub­stances as treatment - The child's mother paid for the examination and vitamins - The accused was convicted under the Medical Profession Act that he, not being registered and licensed under that Act, engaged in the practice of medicine for hire, gain or hope of reward - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench affirmed the convictions - The court held that whether the accused's acts were intended or perceived as practising medi­cine was irrelevant - The issue was whether he was practising medicine, ie. diagnosing or treating patients - See para­graphs 34 to 39.

Medicine - Topic 1802

Unauthorized practice - Punishments - Unlawfully practising medicine - After examining a child and taking a sample of her blood, the accused advised that she suffered from various maladies, including liver damage, a heart condition, deficient bone marrow and a precancerous condition which could lead to leukaemia - The accused recommended vitamins and other substances as treatment - The child's mother paid for the examination and vi­tamins - The accused was convicted under the Medical Profession Act that he, not being registered and licensed under that Act, engaged in the practice of medicine for hire, gain or hope of reward - He was fined $2,500 for each of two counts - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench affirmed the sentences - See paragraphs 46 to 52.

Statutes - Topic 510

Interpretation - Strict interpretation - [See first Medicine - Topic 1703 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Sommervill, [1963] 3 C.C.C. 240 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

Pauzé v. Gauvin, [1954] S.C.R. 15, folld. [para. 23].

College of Pharmacists (Qué.) v. Laporte (1974), 10 N.R. 602; 23 C.C.C.(2d) 45, folld. [para. 24].

R. v. Sandhar (1988), 86 A.R. 241 (C.A.), folld. [para. 25].

Ontario Medical Act, Re (1906), 13 O.L.R. 501 (C.A.), consd. [para. 28].

In Re Ontario Medical Act - see Ontario Medical Act, Re.

R. v. Wong, [1979] 6 W.W.R. 163; 24 A.R. 430 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Nomm (1983), 57 N.S.R.(2d) 66; 120 A.P.R. 66 (Co. Ct.), refd to. [para. 28].

British Columbia (Attorney General) v. Infomap Services Inc. (1990), 68 D.L.R.(4th) 1 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Ringrose (1989), 94 A.R. 350 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 35].

R. v. Andres, [1982] 2 W.W.R. 249; 1 Sask.R. 96 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 41].

Rieger et al. v. Burgess et al. (1988), 66 Sask.R. 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 43].

R. v. Morrissette (1970), 1 C.C.C.(2d) 307 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 47].

R. v. McGinn (1989), 75 Sask.R. 161; 49 C.C.C.(3d) 137 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 48].

R. v. Gregoire et al. (1990), 85 Sask.R. 313 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 50].

Statutes Noticed:

Medical Profession Act, S.S. 1981, c. M-10.1, sect. 79, sect. 80 [para. 18].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Concise Oxford Dictionary (8th Ed. 1990) [para. 35].

Counsel:

Kenneth J. Karwandy, for the appellant;

Anthony B. Gerein, for the Crown.

This appeal was heard before Barclay, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Regina, who delivered the following judgment on October 20, 1994.