Case information

Administrative law — Judicial review — Standard of review — Natural justice — Disciplinary council of professional order finding applicant pharmacist guilty of charges — Pharmacist bringing two applications for judicial review of two interim decisions by council — Whether Court of Appeal erred in applying reasonableness standard to issues of procedural fairness in judicial review context, even though correctness standard is applied to this type of issue everywhere else in Canada — Whether Court of Appeal’s decision deprived applicant of right to present relevant expert evidence and to disavow admission by her former counsel — Whether this divergence between Quebec approach and approach adopted by courts elsewhere in Canada creates serious legal uncertainty for litigants — How to distinguish substantive issue from procedural issue — How to ensure that same distinguishing principles apply throughout Canada and that Canadian litigants are thus treated fairly.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

(PUBLICATION BAN IN CASE)

In 2018, following an inquiry, 14 disciplinary complaints were filed against the applicant pharmacist, Jessie Haggaï, by the respondent, Marie-Josée Loiselle, in her capacity as assistant syndic of the Ordre des pharmaciens du Québec. The charges alleged a number of professional breaches by Ms. Haggaï, including a breach of her obligation to charge fair and reasonable fees for her pharmaceutical services. In 2020, the disciplinary council of the Ordre des pharmaciens du Québec found Ms. Haggaï guilty on all charges, and a penalty decision was then rendered in 2022. In the course of the inquiry and the disciplinary process, the council had rendered two interim decisions against Ms. Haggaï, refusing to allow her to present expert evidence and denying her request to disavow her former counsel and repudiate some of that counsel’s acts. Ms. Haggaï then brought two applications for judicial review of the council’s two interim decisions.

A judge of the Quebec Superior Court allowed Ms. Haggaï’s applications and annulled the two interim decisions, finding that they violated Ms. Haggaï’s right to procedural fairness; he ordered that the record be returned to the disciplinary council, before a different panel. The judge also annulled the disciplinary council’s ultimate decision finding Ms. Haggaï guilty of all the charges laid against her, except one (to which Ms. Haggaï had pleaded guilty), and also annulled the council’s penalty decision (except on the same charge to which Ms. Haggaï had pleaded guilty). The Court of Appeal unanimously allowed the assistant syndic’s appeal; it overturned the Superior Court’s conclusions with regard to the council’s two interim decisions, restored the two interim decisions and held that the decisions on guilt and on the penalty should also be restored.