New Brunswick Institute of Chartered Accountants v. Nicholson, 1993 CanLII 5404 (NB C.A.)

Print:	PDF Format
Date:	1993-11-12
Docket:	253/93/CA
Parallel citations:	(1993), 147 N.B.R. (2d) 158 • (1993), 147 N.B.R. (2e) 158
URL:	http://www.canlii.org/en/nb/nbca/doc/1993/1993canlii5404/1993canlii5404.html
Noteup:	Search for decisions citing this decision

Reflex Record (related decisions, legislation cited and decisions cited)

Decisions cited

Kenney v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of New Brunswick, 1991 CanLII 3989 (NB C.A.) — (1991), 120 N.B.R. (2d) 49 • (1991), 85 D.L.R. (4th) 637
Mackin v. New Brunswick, 1987 CanLII 138 (NB C.A.) — (1987), 82 N.B.R. (2d) 203 • (1987), 82 N.B.R. (2e) 203 • (1987), 44 D.L.R. (4th) 730

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW BRUNSWICK

Hoyt, C.J.N.B., Rice and Turnbull, JJ.A.

Date: 19931112

Docket: 253/93/CA

BETWEEN:

THE NEW BRUNSWICK INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS

(DEFENDANT) APPELLANT

-and-

DANIEL NICHOLSON

(PLAINTIFF) RESPONDENT

APPEAL FROM DECISION OF Dickson, J.

July 29, 1993

DATE OF HEARING November 12, 1993

DATE OF DECISION November 12, 1993

COUNSEL:

Peter T. Zed, Esq. for the Appellant

David Duncan Young, Esq. for the Respondent

BY THE COURT

(Orally)

This is an appeal from a decision of Dickson, J. in the Court of Queen's Bench in which he quashed an inquiry by an investigation committee of the appellant New Brunswick Institute of Chartered Accountants. The committee sought to investigate the conduct of one of its members, the respondent Daniel Nicholson.

[Page 2]

The investigation was prompted by a letter from two members of the Institute. The Judge quashed the investigation because, relying on Mackin v. Judicial Council (N.B.) 1987 CanLII 138 (NB C.A.), (1987), 82 N.B.R. (2d) 203 and Kenney v. College of Physicians and Surgeons (N.B.) 1991 CanLII 3989 (NB C.A.), (1991), 120 N.B.R. (2d) 49, it was his view that the letter did not constitute a complaint. We can add nothing usefully to his decision, except perhaps to emphasise that although courts are reluctant to interfere with the conduct of self-governing professional bodies, there must be, in this situation, a complaint before disciplinary procedures may be invoked. We do not suggest that the complaint must be viewed as valid, but it must contain sufficient particulars to inform the investigating body what it is to investigate and to alert the member what professional misconduct or unfitness to practice is being alleged.

For that reason, we dismiss the appeal with costs of $260.00 payable by the appellant to the respondent.