Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• The motion for an extension of time to seek judicial review was filed almost two years after the 30-day deadline.

• Ms. McMillan’s explanation for the delay, including emotional distress and compliance with the ICRC’s order, was found insufficient.

• The standard of review for the ICRC’s decision was reasonableness, limiting the court’s ability to intervene.

• Ms. McMillan alleged procedural unfairness due to the passage of time and claimed her evidence was not considered.

• The ICRC relied on contemporaneous documentation and employer interviews rather than Ms. McMillan’s version of events.

• The College sought and was awarded costs, with the court ordering Ms. McMillan to pay $2,500.

Background and facts

Ms. Lisbeth McMillan, a nurse, was the subject of a report to the College of Nurses of Ontario by her former employer, Sunnybrook Health Science Centre. The report raised concerns about her interactions with colleagues, failure to appropriately attend to patients, medication errors, and improper access to and alteration of patient records. The Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee (ICRC) of the College required Ms. McMillan to complete a specified continuing education or remediation program (SCERP) and attend for a caution, based only on concerns about medication errors and inappropriate access to patient charts. The ICRC did not refer Ms. McMillan for disciplinary action.

Ms. McMillan sought an extension of time to apply for judicial review of the ICRC’s decision, filing her motion on April 25, 2025, almost two years after the 30-day deadline. She argued that the ICRC’s decision did not consider her evidence and that the process was procedurally unfair, particularly due to the passage of time between the incidents and the report.

Legal proceedings and issues

The court considered whether to grant an extension of time under s. 5(2) of the Judicial Review Procedure Act, which allows an extension if there are apparent grounds for relief and no substantial prejudice or hardship will result. The court examined the length of and explanation for the delay, the merits of the proposed application, and potential prejudice to the College and public interest.

Ms. McMillan acknowledged she was aware of her right to seek judicial review by May 4, 2023, within the required timeframe, but did not file in a timely manner despite receiving information and instructions from the court and the College on several occasions between June 2023 and February 2025. She cited emotional distress and time spent complying with the ICRC’s order as reasons for the delay.

Court’s analysis and decision

Justice O’Brien found that Ms. McMillan’s grounds for judicial review were weak, noting the court’s limited role and the deference owed to the ICRC’s assessment. The ICRC had addressed the passage of time and considered Ms. McMillan’s submissions, relying on contemporaneous documentation and employer interviews. The court was not satisfied with Ms. McMillan’s explanation for the delay, finding no sufficient justification for nearly two years’ delay in filing.

The motion for an extension of time was dismissed. The College of Nurses of Ontario was the successful party and was awarded costs in the amount of $2,500, a significant reduction from its actual costs of over $14,000. No damages were awarded, as the matter was limited to procedural and cost issues.