Whether you are a regulated health professional or an unregulated practitioner, your career depends on your professional reputation and the trust of your clients. Complaints, investigations, and legal challenges—regulatory or otherwise—can seriously impact your ability to practice. At Tamir Litigation, we offer strong, experienced legal defence for a wide range of healthcare providers across Ontario.

We understand the distinct challenges facing both regulated professionals and unregulated practitioners. Our approach is strategic, discreet, and tailored to your profession.

Common Issues We Handle:

Complaints and formal investigations

Professional misconduct and discipline hearings

Fitness-to-practice or incapacity concerns

Licensing, registration, and renewal issues

Employer reporting and practice audits

Appeals to  HPARB and judicial review in court 

Unregulated Health Practitioners

 Therapists like  osteopathic manual practitioners are not currently regulated under Ontario’s health professions regulatory framework, but that does not mean they are immune to legal risk. Civil claims, professional complaints, or contractual disputes can pose serious threats to your business and reputation.

We help  osteopathic manual practitioners and other unregulated professionals defend against:

  • Allegations of negligence or improper practice
  • Breach of contract or scope-of-practice disputes
  • Practice management and client complaint issues
  • Risk management and compliance advice 

Why Choose Tamir Litigation

  • Extensive experience in health law and professional regulation
  • Representation before regulatory colleges, courts, and tribunals
  • Customized legal strategies for your specific profession
  • Dedicated to protecting your license, livelihood, and reputation


Relevant Blog Posts

Effective March 1, 2026, the CNO is retiring the "Therapeutic Nurse-Client Relationship" standard in favor of a stricter "Professional Boundaries" framework. This shift, alongside the new Documentation standard effective February 1, 2026, explicitly targets modern risks like Artificial Intelligence and social media. The new rules mandate that nurses remain accountable for AI-generated notes and strictly prohibit "connecting" with current or former patients on personal social media platforms. Platforms like TikTok are now fair game for scrutiny. Silence or "private" settings are not defenses. These changes turn grey areas into misconduct traps. Nurses facing complaints under these new 2026 standards need immediate regulatory defence.
CICC v Bayegan, 2025 CICC 26 confirms that good character in licensing turns on disclosure, not explanation. The Registrar refused an RCIC licence after finding it probable the applicant engaged in unauthorized practice and failed to disclose outstanding criminal charges in her statutory declaration. On appeal, the Registrar Appeal Committee upheld the refusal, stressing that licensing is a credibility assessment, not a trial on the merits of alleged misconduct or criminal charges. Non-disclosure itself justified refusal. Attempts to introduce new evidence and contextual explanations on appeal were rejected. The appeal was dismissed and $7,500 in costs ordered, reinforcing that statutory declarations are foundational.
In RCDSO v. Kwong (2025 ONRCDSO 1), a Scarborough dentist was suspended for five months after admitting he falsified records by backdating patient treatment dates to maximize year-end insurance benefits. The RCDSO panel found this conduct amounted to multiple acts of professional misconduct, including falsification, false reporting, and unethical behaviour. The penalty included suspension, ethics and billing courses, 24 months of practice monitoring, and a ban on employing his spouse. The case underscores that even “helping” patients use expiring benefits is still considered falsification.