A settlement in an Ontario professional discipline matter typically involves counsel for both sides preparing an Agreed Statement of Facts (setting out the facts and admissions) and a Joint Submission on Penalty (setting out the agreed penalty and costs). The hearing panel considers the joint submission and will generally accept it unless doing so would bring the administration of justice into disrepute or be contrary to the public interest. Settlements almost always involve a costs order, and the resulting finding is still published on the regulator's public register.
- A settlement typically involves an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission on Penalty prepared jointly by counsel.
- Hearing panels typically accept a joint submission unless doing so would bring the administration of justice into disrepute or be contrary to the public interest.
- Settlement offers almost always involve a costs order — often a minimum in the range of $10,000 or more.
- Pleading to professional misconduct through settlement still results in the finding being published on the regulator's public register, typically indefinitely.
- A settlement can avoid the time, cost, and uncertainty of a fully contested hearing while still resolving the underlying complaint.
- Settlement is available across most Ontario regulatory colleges — the same general framework applies whether the regulator is the LSO, a health college, or another professional body.
Why Settlement Is So Common
A fully contested discipline hearing is expensive, time-consuming, and uncertain for both the regulator and the member. Across Ontario's professional colleges, a significant share of matters that reach the discipline stage resolve through a negotiated settlement — an originating process option that lets both sides avoid the cost and unpredictability of a hearing while still resolving the complaint.
The Agreed Statement of Facts
When a resolution is reached, counsel for the regulator and counsel for the member jointly prepare an Agreed Statement of Facts — a document setting out the facts of the case and the specific admissions the member is making. This document forms the factual record the hearing panel relies on when considering whether to accept the settlement.
The Joint Submission on Penalty
Alongside the Agreed Statement of Facts, counsel prepare a Joint Submission on Penalty — setting out the specific penalty and costs award both sides have agreed upon. Together, these two documents are submitted to the hearing panel for consideration and approval, generally at a hearing held on consent rather than a fully contested one.
Will the Panel Accept It?
Settlements agreed upon by experienced counsel are typically accepted by hearing panels. However, acceptance is not automatic — a panel can reject a joint submission if it believes accepting it would bring the administration of justice into disrepute or would otherwise be contrary to the public interest. This is a meaningful check, but in practice, well-negotiated settlements that reflect a proportionate outcome are rarely rejected.
Because panels defer significantly to a properly negotiated joint submission, the negotiation itself — not just the eventual hearing — is often where the real outcome of a settled matter is determined.
Costs and the Public Register
Settlement does not mean avoiding consequences entirely. A settlement offer will almost invariably require the member to pay costs, which in some contexts start at a minimum in the range of $10,000 or more depending on the regulator and the complexity of the matter. Pleading to professional misconduct through a settlement also results in the finding being published on the regulator's public register, typically on an indefinite basis — settlement resolves the legal process, but the public record of the finding remains.
Before agreeing to any settlement involving an admission of misconduct, consider how that finding will appear on the public register — a factor that matters as much to many professionals as the immediate penalty itself.
When Settlement Isn't the Right Call
Settlement is not always the right strategy. Where a member has a genuine, strong defence — factual or legal — or where a proposed penalty is disproportionate to the underlying conduct, proceeding to a contested hearing may be the better path, notwithstanding the added time and cost. This is a strategic, case-specific decision that benefits significantly from experienced regulatory counsel.
A Toronto professional facing a discipline allegation has clear documentary evidence contradicting a key element of the complaint. Rather than accepting an early settlement offer that would still require an admission, counsel advises proceeding toward a hearing — ultimately negotiating a much more favourable resolution once the regulator's case is tested through disclosure.
Call our Toronto regulatory defence lawyers at 416-274-2222 to discuss whether settlement is the right strategy for your matter.
Frequently Asked Questions
Very common. Across most regulatory colleges, a significant share of matters that reach the discipline stage resolve through a negotiated settlement rather than proceeding to a fully contested hearing, given the cost, time, and uncertainty a hearing involves for both the regulator and the member.
It is a document prepared jointly by counsel for the regulator and the member, setting out the facts of the case and the specific admissions the member is making. It forms the factual foundation the hearing panel relies on in accepting a settlement.
A document, prepared alongside the Agreed Statement of Facts, setting out the penalty and costs award that both sides have agreed upon — submitted to the hearing panel for its consideration and approval.
Settlements agreed upon by counsel are typically accepted, but not automatically — a panel can reject a joint submission if it believes accepting it would bring the administration of justice into disrepute or would otherwise be contrary to the public interest.
Almost always, yes. A settlement component will invariably require payment of costs, which in some contexts starts at a minimum in the range of $10,000 or more, depending on the regulator and the complexity of the matter.
No. Pleading guilty to professional misconduct through a settlement still results in the finding being published on the regulator's public register, typically on an indefinite basis — settlement resolves the process, but does not make the outcome invisible.
Where you have a genuine, strong factual or legal defence, where the proposed penalty is disproportionate to the conduct, or where the reputational and professional consequences of an admission outweigh the benefits of avoiding a hearing. This is a case-by-case strategic decision that should be made with legal advice.