Executive Summary: Key legal and evidentiary issues

• Whether the Discipline Committee had sufficient evidence to find the appellant guilty of professional misconduct

• Whether the motion to adduce fresh evidence met the legal test for admissibility on appeal

• Assessment of the Discipline Committee’s credibility findings and factual conclusions

• The role of the College in compelling production of documents or witnesses on behalf of the appellant

• Whether the penalty imposed was reasonable and within the accepted range for similar misconduct

• Whether the appellant established a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of the Discipline Committee

Facts of the case

Faina Brodsky, a Registered Practical Nurse, appealed the decision of the Discipline Committee of the College of Nurses of Ontario. The Discipline Committee found that Brodsky had submitted false benefit claims through her employer Baycrest Health Sciences’ group plan between 2016 and 2018, resulting in payments of over $9,000. Baycrest’s investigation revealed that certain providers were issuing false receipts and that Brodsky and her family had made multiple same-day claims for identical services from providers suspected of fraudulent activity. Following her termination from employment, the College investigated and referred the matter to discipline. The Discipline Committee found that Brodsky’s testimony, as well as that of her husband and daughter, was not credible. It concluded that the false submissions constituted professional misconduct and ordered a six-month suspension of Brodsky’s certificate, terms and conditions on her registration, and payment of costs.

Outcome

The court dismissed both the appeal and Brodsky’s motion to adduce fresh evidence. The motion was denied because the documents were either already available at the time of the hearing, were hearsay, or would not reasonably have affected the outcome. The court held that the Discipline Committee’s findings of fact and credibility were supported by the record and showed no palpable or overriding error. It further found that the College was under no obligation to compel documents on Brodsky’s behalf, that there was no error in how the Committee handled expert witness qualification, and that allegations of bias were unfounded. Finally, the penalty imposed was reasonable and within the expected range for the type of misconduct. The court ordered Brodsky to pay $6,500 in costs to the College of Nurses of Ontario.