Case Summary: Written Reasons In Administrative Decisions

Fashoranti v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Nova Scotia, 2015 NSCA 25, dismissing an appeal from the disciplinary committee's finding that a physician committed unprofessional conduct.

A physician was charged with unprofessional conduct in performing an inappropriate breast examination. The disciplinary committee found the complainant's testimony was credible and the physician's testimony "evasive" and "self-serving" and determined the physician was guilty of unprofessional conduct. The physician exercised his statutory right to appeal a point of law and appealed to the Court of Appeal on the basis that the committee had erred in law by not giving sufficient reasons. He argued the reasons were insufficient because the committee failed to cite specific examples of evasive and self-serving testimony.

The Court of Appeal applied the Supreme Court's decision in Newfoundland and Labrador Nurses' Union v. Newfoundland and Labrador, [2011] 3 SCR 708, in which the SCC held that insufficient reasons are not a standalone ground of appeal but may be assessed as part of the test of whether the outcome was reasonable because it was justifiable, transparent and intelligible and fell within a range of acceptable outcomes.

The Court of Appeal explained that the main role of written reasons is to assist with determining whether the outcome was justifiable, transparent and intelligible. As it...