|
|
ÐÏ à¡± á > þÿ p r þÿÿÿ o ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿì¥Á @ ñ ¿ f bjbjqäqä 4x Ž Ž @] R ÿÿ ÿÿ ÿÿ ˆ Ú Ú Ú F 4 T T T h ° ° ° 8 è ü , h ³/ ¶ 4 4 4 4 4 2/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ $ i0 R »2 | X/ T ] ] ] X/ T T 4 4 Û m/ = = = ] f T 4 T 4 2/ = ] 2/ = = R Ð$ * T T Z+ 4 ( €é¶8ÕÈ ° Ã Ö ú* 2/ ƒ/ 0 ³/ + B 73 ™ d 73 Z+ h h T T T T 73 T r+ À ’ ¡ h = T ] X/ X/ h h ä L d ý @ h h L Supreme Court of Canada Ringrose v. College of Physicians and Surgeons (Alberta), [1977] 1 S.C.R. 814 Date: 1976-06-29 Charles Alexander Douglas Ringrose Appellant; and The College of Physicians and Surgeons of the Province of Alberta Respondent. 1976: February 17; 1976: June 29. Present: Laskin C.J. and Martland, Judson, Ritchie, Spence, Pigeon, Dickson, Beetz and de Grandpré JJ. ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ALBERTA, APPELLATE DIVISION Physicians and surgeons—Suspension from practice—Investigation by discipline committee of College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta—Suspension recommended of appellant medical practitioner—Member of discipline committee also member of executive committee which earlier purported to suspend appellant—Member not privy to decision of executive committee—No reasonable apprehension of bias—The Medical Profession Act, R.S.A. 1970, c. 230, ss. 47, 66. The appellant, a medical practitioner registered with the respondent College, was served with two notices: (1) that it had been reported to the discipline committee of the College that he might have been guilty of unbecoming conduct under four different headings and that a meeting of the discipline committee would be held on July 11, 1973; (2) that on the instruction of the executive committee of the council of the College, he was suspended from the privileges of a medical practitioner pending investigation by the discipline committee. On June 5, 1973, the Supreme Court of Alberta quashed the purported suspension. Following the hearings of the discipline committee, it recommended to the council that the appellant be suspended for one year. A Dr. McCutcheon who sat as a member of the discipline committee was also a member o
|
