A panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Panel") conducted a hearing to determine if the respondent, Ming Fung, contravened College standards and engaged in unprofessional conduct.
The Panel determined, pursuant to section 39(1) of the Health Professions Act (the “Act") that the respondent failed to respond to College inquiries and requests for information in a full and substantive manner with respect to a complaint against him, thereby contravening a College bylaw and the Responsibility and Accountability Professional Standard. The Panel also determined that this constituted unprofessional conduct.
In it's decision, the Panel made the following statement about the importance of all registrants cooperating with the College:
 The Panel agrees with the reasoning expressed in the cases cited by the College about the importance of a registrant cooperating with their self-governing body. Compliance with the duty to cooperate is important not just to ensure that this particular investigation proceeded with dispatch, but also because the College is a self-governing profession, and its primary mandate is to protect the public. The College relies upon the cooperation and compliance of its members during the investigation process in order to effectively regulate the profession in the public interest and for the public's protection. A registrant's failure to cooperate with the College risks undermining the public's confidence in the College's ability to regulate its members.
The full decision of the Panel can be found here.
The Panel will deliberate and decide on appropriate penalty and costs, pursuant to section 39 of the Act, after receiving submissions and any further evidence. The outcome will be made public once determined by the Panel.
Inquiries should be directed to email@example.com.