Summaries of Allegations
Matters that will be proceeding before the Discipline Committee, and the hearing dates (if known).

Member

Summary of Allegations

Abdel Messih, Sherif

As a result of a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Abdel Messih committed professional misconduct in that hardcopies were not signed by the dispensing pharmacist; patient counselling and other information were not documented; he signed hardcopies and completed other documentation after the date of dispensing, when he had not dispensed the drugs or provided the counselling; authorizations were not attached to hardcopies; on July 18, 2012, he failed to ensure that a pharmacist was physically present in Main Drug Mart; on one or more occasions during the period 2005 –November 5, 2009, pharmacy assistant S.S. provided counselling to a patient known as “D.L” regarding her medications; and on or about July 18, 2012, pharmacy assistant S.S.: (i) provided counselling regarding Tylenol #1; and/or (ii) sold Tylenol #1 to a customer. In particular, it is alleged that he failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession; failed to keep records as required; falsified a record relating to his practice; signed or issued, in his professional capacity, a document he knew contained a false or misleading statement; contravened the Act, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act (“DPRA”), the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, or the regulations under those Acts, and in particular, sections 146, 155 and/or 156 of the DPRA and sections 4 and 54 of Regulation 58/11 under the DPRA; contravened a federal or provincial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, sale or dispensing of any drug or mixture of drugs, and in particular, section C.01.041 of the Food and Drug Regulations, C.R.C., c. 870, as amended, to the Food and Drugs Act, R.S.C. 1985, c.F-27, as amended, and section 31 of the Narcotic Control Regulations, C.R.C., c.1041, as amended, under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19, as amended; engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional Hearing Date: TBA

Member

Summary of Allegations

Al-Tamimi, Ahmed

As a result of a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Al-Tamimi committed professional misconduct in that he falsified pharmacy records relating to his practice in connection with one or more of the claims made to the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care; signed or issued, in his professional capacity, a document that he knew contained a false or misleading statement in connection with one or more of the claims made to the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care; and/or submitted an account or charge for services that he knew was false or misleading in connection with one or more of the claims made to the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care In particular, it is alleged that he failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession; falsified a record relating to his practice; signed or issued, in his professional capacity, a document that he knew contained a false or misleading statement; submitted an account or charge for services that he knew was false or misleading; contravened the Pharmacy Act, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, or the regulations under those Acts, and in particular, sections 155 and 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, as amended; contravened a federal or provincial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, sale or dispensing of any drug or mixture of drugs, and in particular, sections 5, 6 and 15(1) of the Ontario Drug Benefits Act, R.S.O. 1990, c 0.10, and sections 25 and 27 of Regulation 201/96 under the Ontario Drug Benefits Act; engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional Hearing Date: May 24, 2013

Member

Summary of Allegations

Bennett, Andrew

As a result of a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Bennett committed professional misconduct in that he failed to cancel unused and/or re-used doses; billed patient G.H. daily for Plavix 75mg from December 21, 2007 to April 27, 2008; billed patient C.B. daily for medications from March 24, 2008 to July 31, 2008; billed patient V.C. weekly for medications from February 11, 2008 to July 25, 2008, and again from August 29, 2008 to October 10, 2008; charged an individual dispensing fee for each of multiple doses of methadone dispensed to patients as carries in the absence of a methadone capitation agreement; charged an individual dispensing fee for each of 2 prescriptions of Gabapentin 300mg dispensed concurrently to G.B. from August 24, 2007 to November 20, 2007, pursuant to the transfer of only 1 prescription to the pharmacy; dispensed methadone doses to patients as carries without authorization; dispensed Rx# 1008996, 1008999 and 1009001 without authorization; failed to maintain records as required; reduced the quantity of methadone dispensed without authorization; dispensed drugs in weekly compliance pill packs in less than the full amount prescribed for patients without informed authorizations in writing from those patients; recorded 2 prescriptions of Gabapentin 300mg dispensed concurrently to G.B. from August 24, 2007 to November 20, 2007, pursuant to the transfer of only 1 prescription to the pharmacy; In particular, it is alleged that he failed to maintain the standards of practice of the profession; failed to keep records as required respecting the member’s patients; falsified a record relating to the member’s practice; charged a fee that was excessive in relation to the service provided; contravened the Pharmacy Act, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, or the regulations under those Acts, and in particular, sections 155 and/or 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, as amended; contravened a federal or provincial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, sale or dispensing of any drug or mixture of drugs, and in particular, section 9 of the Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.23; section 5 of O.Reg. 936 under the Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act; sections 5, 6(2) and 15(a) and (b) of the Ontario Drug Benefit Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.O.10; subsections 18(7), 18(8), 18(9) and 18(10) of Ontario Regulation 201/96 under the Ontario Drug Benefit Act; and section 38 of the Narcotic Control Regulations, C.R.C., c.1041, as amended, under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19, as amended; engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional Hearing Date: TBA As a result of a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Bennett committed professional misconduct in that he charged an individual dispensing fee for each of multiple doses of methadone dispensed to patients as carries in the absence of a methadone capitation agreement from October 14, 2009 to March 5, 2011 In particular, it is alleged that he failed to maintain the standards of practice of the profession; submitted an account or charge for services that he knew was false or misleading; charged a fee that is excessive in relation to the service provided; contravened a federal or provincial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, sale or dispensing of any drug or mixture of drugs, and in particular, section 20 of Ontario Regulation 201/96 under the Ontario Drug Benefit Act; engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional Hearing Date: TBA

Member

Summary of Allegations

Blahey, Lou Ann

As a result a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Ms. Blahey committed professional misconduct in that she: dispensed a Schedule 1 and/or Schedule F drugs, controlled drugs, narcotics, and/or targeted substances without a prescription and/or proper authorization from on or about April 5, 2010 to January 27, 2012; recorded authorizations for prescriptions and/or refills of prescriptions where no such authorization was given, and/or altering one or more written prescriptions without proper authorization; submitted false claims to third-party payors including Ontario Blue Cross and ESI. In particular, it is alleged that she: failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession; falsified records relating to her practice; signed or issued, in her professional capacity, a document that she knew contained a false or misleading statement; submitted accounts or charges for services that she knew to be false or misleading; contravened the Pharmacy Act, 1991, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, or the regulations under those Acts, and in particular, s. 155 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, as amended, and/or s. 40 of Ontario Regulation 58/11 made thereunder; contravened, while engaged in the practice of pharmacy, a federal or provincial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, sale or dispensing of any drug or mixture of drugs, and in particular, ss. C.01.041 and G.03.002 of the Food and Drug Regulations C.R.C., c. 870, as amended, to the Food and Drugs Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-27, as amended, and/or section 31 of the Narcotic Control Regulations, C.R.C., c. 1041, as amended, and/or s. 51 of the Benzodiazapines and Other Targeted Substances Regulations, S.O.R./2000-271 under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19, as amended; engaged in conduct or performed an act or acts relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regarding to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional Hearing Date: June 14, 2013

Member

Summary of Allegations

Chabursky, Andrij

As a result a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Chabursky committed professional misconduct in that he requested and/or accepted rebates totaling approximately $3.2 million from generic drug manufacturers contrary to the Ontario Drug Benefit Act, section 11.5 and/or the Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act, section 12.1, as then in effect, with respect to the following activities, in or about January 2007-December 2008: accepting rebates characterized as professional allowances in excess of the 20% limit for the manufacturer’s drug products reimbursed under the Ontario Drug Benefit Act, as specified in O.Reg. 201/96, section 1(9); accepting rebates characterized as professional allowances for activities other than the activities permitted for professional allowances, under the Ontario Drug Benefit Act, as listed in O.Reg. 201/96, section 1(8) or otherwise in accordance with the Code of Conduct in O.Reg. 201/96, Schedule 3; and/or accepting rebates characterized as professional allowances for activities other than the activities permitted for professional allowances, under the Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act, as listed in Regulation 935, section 2(1) or otherwise in accordance with the Code of Conduct in Regulation 935, Schedule 1. In particular, it is alleged that he failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession; contravened a federal or provincial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, sale or dispensing of any drug or mixture of drugs; permitted, consented to or approved, either expressly or by implication, the commission of an offence against any Act relating to the practice of pharmacy or to the sale of drugs by a corporation of which he was a director; engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional Hearing Date: TBA

Member

Summary of Allegations

Chow, Allen

As a result a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Chow committed professional misconduct in that he practised the profession and dispensed while his ability to do so was impaired by a substance on or about December 4, 2012; dispensed Schedule 1 and/or Schedule F drugs, controlled drugs, narcotics, and/or targeted substances without a prescription and/or proper authorization on or about December 4, 2012; dispensed drugs not labelled in accordance with the authorizing prescription and/or of a dosage not in accordance with the authorizing prescription on or about December 4, 2012; submitted false claims to third-party payors In particular, it is alleged that he practised the profession while his ability to do so was impaired by a substance; failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession; contravened the Pharmacy Act, 1991, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, or the regulations under those Acts, and in particular, s. 155 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, as amended, and/or s. 40 of Ontario Regulation 58/11 made thereunder, as well as s. 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, as amended, and/or s. 40 of Ontario Regulation 58/11 made thereunder; contravened, while engaged in the practice of pharmacy, a federal or provincial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, sale or dispensing of any drug or mixture of drugs, and in particular, ss. C.01.041 and G.03.002 of the Food and Drug Regulations C.R.C., c. 870, as amended, to the Food and Drugs Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-27, as amended, and/or section 31 of the Narcotic Control Regulations, C.R.C., c. 1041, as amended, and/or s. 51 of the Benzodiazapines and Other Targeted Substances Regulations, S.O.R./2000-271 under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19, as amended engaged in conduct or performed an act or acts relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regarding to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional Hearing Date: TBA

Member

Summary of Allegations

Fahmy, Armia

As a result of a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Fahmy committed professional misconduct in that he on or about October 14, 2011, purported to authorize the refill of a prescription for patient Mr. J.B. without complying with all of the conditions set out in s. 42 of Ontario Regulation 58/11 made under the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, thereby contravening that section of that regulation; on or about December 21, 2011, entered a new prescription for patient D.B., when this was in fact a refill of a prescription dated November 16, 2011, without properly documenting this fact; on or about November 6, 2011, dispensed drugs to patient R.S. pursuant to a verbal authorization from a prescriber, without complying with all of the conditions set out in s. 40 of Ontario Regulation 58/11 made under the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, thereby contravening that section of that regulation; dispensed drugs pursuant to a prescription without ensuring the information prescribed by s. 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, was recorded on the prescription; failed to take all reasonable steps necessary to protect narcotics and controlled substances at the pharmacy against loss or theft and, in particular, failed to maintain accurate inventories and other records of narcotics and controlled substances purchased by and dispensed at the pharmacy and/or failed to report loss or theft of narcotics and controlled substances and/or to otherwise account for inventory discrepancies, for the period from April 1, 2011 to May 1, 2012; failed to obtain confirmation of a patient’s prior dose of methadone before dispensing methadone to that patient, and/or failed to keep a record of that confirmation; created a misleading and/or inaccurate dispensing record by backdating dispensing records to a date different than the date on which the records were created, without appropriately documenting that fact; dispensed drugs pursuant to a prescription without ensuring the information prescribed by s. 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, was recorded on the container on which the drugs were dispensed; inaccurately recorded the identity of the prescriber in patient and pharmacy records; dispensed drugs pursuant to a prescription while inaccurately recording the identity of the prescriber on prescription hardcopies, contrary to s. 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4; created a misleading and/or inaccurate dispensing record by dispensing drugs pursuant to prescription hardcopies containing the notation “reprint” and/or “modified reprint,” without documenting that there was no original hardcopy and/or without documenting the changes from the original hardcopy; dispensed narcotics pursuant to prescriptions that were not signed by the prescribers, contrary to s. 40 of Ontario Regulation 58/11 made under the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, and s. 155 of that Act, and to s. 31 of the Narcotic Control Regulations, C.R.C. c. 1041, made under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19; dispensed drugs pursuant to a prescription while inaccurately and/or unclearly recording directions for use compared with those intended by the prescriber, contrary to s. 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4; dispensed different drugs than those authorized by the prescriber, contrary to s. 155 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, and/or to s. C.01.041 of the Food and Drug Regulations, C.R.C., c. 870, made under the Food and Drugs Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-27, and/or to s. 31 of the Narcotic Control Regulations, C.R.C. c. 1041, made under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19; dispensed drugs pursuant to a prescription as dispensing pharmacist without recording his signature on the prescription, contrary to s. 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4; dispensed drugs pursuant to a prescription while incorrectly recording the quantity of drug authorized by the prescriber, contrary to s. 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4; dispensed drugs pursuant to a prescription while incorrectly recording the quantity and/or strength of the drug dispensed, contrary to s. 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4; dispensed drugs pursuant to a prescription while incorrectly recording the date on which the drug was dispensed to the patient, contrary to s. 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4; dispensed narcotics without authorization from a prescriber and/or on a date not authorized by the prescriber, contrary to s. 155 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, and s. 31 of the Narcotic Control Regulations, C.R.C. c. 1041, made under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19; dispensed narcotics to patients on days not authorized by a prescriber, contrary to s. 155 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, and s. 31 of the Narcotic Control Regulations, C.R.C. c. 1041, made under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19; dispensed drugs pursuant to a prescription in a quantity less than the entire quantity authorized by the prescriber, contrary to s. 9 of the Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.23; and/or dispensed a narcotic to patient D.H. pursuant to a prescription after the quantity of the narcotic specified in the prescription had already been dispensed, contrary to s. 37 of the Narcotic Control Regulations, C.R.C., c. 1041, made under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19, on or about February 7, 2012. In particular, it is alleged that he: failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession; contravened the Act, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, or the regulations under those Acts; contravened a federal or provincial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, sale or dispensing of any drug or mixture of drugs; engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional Hearing Date: TBA

Member

Summary of Allegations

Guirguis, Sameh

As a result of a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Guirguis committed professional misconduct in that he dispensed drugs pursuant to a prescription without ensuring the information prescribed by s. 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, was recorded on the prescription; failed to obtain confirmation of a patient’s prior dose of methadone before dispensing methadone to that patient, and/or failed to keep a record of that confirmation; created a misleading and/or inaccurate dispensing record by backdating dispensing records to a date different than the date on which the records were created, without appropriately documenting that fact; dispensed drugs pursuant to a prescription without ensuring the information prescribed by s. 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, was recorded on the container on which the drugs were dispensed; dispensed drugs pursuant to a prescription while inaccurately recording the identity of the prescriber on prescription hardcopies, contrary to s. 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4; created a misleading and/or inaccurate dispensing record by dispensing drugs pursuant to prescription hardcopies containing the notation “reprint” and/or “modified reprint,” without documenting that there was no original hardcopy and/or without documenting the changes from the original hardcopy; dispensed drugs pursuant to a prescription while inaccurately and/or unclearly recording directions for use compared with those intended by the prescriber, contrary to s. 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4; dispensed different drugs than those authorized by the prescriber, contrary to s. 155 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, and s. G.03.002 of the Food and Drug Regulations, C.R.C., c. 870, made under the Food and Drugs Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-27; dispensed drugs pursuant to a prescription while incorrectly recording the quantity of drug authorized by the prescriber, contrary to s. 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4; dispensed Schedule 1 drugs in quantity greater than that authorized by the prescriber, contrary to s. 155 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, and s. G.03.002 of the Food and Drug Regulations, C.R.C., c. 870, made under the Food and Drugs Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-27; dispensed drugs pursuant to a prescription while incorrectly recording the quantity and/or strength of the drug dispensed, contrary to s. 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4; dispensed drugs pursuant to a prescription while incorrectly recording the date on which the drug was dispensed to the patient, contrary to s. 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4; dispensed narcotics without authorization from a prescriber and/or on days not authorized by the prescriber, contrary to s. 155 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, and s. 31 of the Narcotic Control Regulations, C.R.C. c. 1041, made under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19; dispensed drugs pursuant to a prescription in a quantity less than the entire quantity authorized by the prescriber, contrary to s. 9 of the Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.23; and/or refilled a prescription for a controlled drug for patient L.P. when the prescriber did not indicate the dates for or the intervals between refills, contrary to s. G.03.006 of the Food and Drug Regulations, C.R.C., c. 870, made under the Food and Drugs Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-27, on or about November 12, 2011. In particular, it is alleged that he failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession; contravened the Act, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, or the regulations under those Acts; contravened a federal or provincial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, sale or dispensing of any drug or mixture of drugs; engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional Hearing Date: TBA

Member

Summary of Allegations

Haditaghi, Majid

As a result of a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Haditaghi committed professional misconduct in that he failed to maintain records as required; improperly stored drugs; failed to cancel unused and/or re-used doses; dispensed reduced quantities without written authorization; incompletely transcribed verbal authorizations In particular, it is alleged that he failed to maintain the standards of practice of the profession; failed to keep records as required respecting his patients; contravened the Act, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, or the regulations under those Acts, and in particular, sections 155 and/or 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, as amended, and section 59 of Regulation 551 under the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act; contravened a federal or provincial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, sale or dispensing of any drug or mixture of drugs, and in particular, section C.01.003 and C.01.004 of the Food and Drug Regulations, C.R.C., c. 870, and section 9 of the Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.23; engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional Hearing Date: October 15, 2013

Member

Summary of Allegations

Katzman, Neil

As a result of a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Katzman committed professional misconduct in that he sold Schedule I/Schedule F drugs by retail without valid prescriptions to 50 patients at addresses in the U.S.; failed to keep records as required with respect to the drugs dispensed to 50 patients; falsified records regarding the prescribers for the drugs dispensed to 50 patients; and/or obstructed and/or failed to cooperate fully with investigators by withholding or concealing from the investigators documents and information relevant to the College’s investigation of his conduct on July 15 and 18, 2011. In particular, it is alleged that he failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession; failed to keep records as required respecting his patients; falsified a record relating to his practice; signed or issued, in his professional capacity, a document that he knew contained a false or misleading statement; contravened the Pharmacy Act, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, or the regulations under those Acts, and in particular, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, sections 155 and/or 156, as well as the Health Professions Procedural Code, section 76; contravened a federal or provincial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, sale or dispensing of any drug or mixture of drugs, and in particular, the Food and Drug Regulations, section C.01.041; knowingly permitted the premises in which a pharmacy was located to be used for unlawful purposes; engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional. Hearing Date: TBA

Member

Summary of Allegations

Ma, Herman

As a result of a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Ma committed professional misconduct in that he falsified pharmacy records relating to his practice in connection with claims made for drugs in 2009; signed or issued, in his professional capacity, a document that he knew contained a false or misleading statement in connection with claims made for drugs in 2009; submitted an account or charge for services that he knew was false or misleading in connection with claims made for drugs in 2009. In particular, it is alleged that he failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession; falsified a record relating to his practice; signed or issued, in his professional capacity, a document that he knew contained a false or misleading statement; submitted an account or charge for services that he knew was false or misleading; contravened the Pharmacy Act, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, or the regulations under those Acts, and in particular, sections 155 and 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act , R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, as amended; contravened a federal or provincial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, sale or dispensing of any drug or mixture of drugs, and in particular, sections 5, 6 and 15(1) of the Ontario Drug Benefit Act, R.S.O. 1990, c O.10, and sections 25 and 27 of Regulation 201/96 under the Ontario Drug Benefit Act; engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional Hearing Date: TBA

Member

Summary of Allegations

Oduro, George

As a result of a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Oduro committed professional misconduct in that, during the period 2010 - 2011, as the owner and/or operator of the Medical Ergonomics Clinic in Mississauga, Ontario, he and/or an employee or employees of Medical Ergonomics Clinic issued invoices or claims for health care services which he knew or ought to have known were false or misleading with respect to one of more of the following patients: (i) D.E. (ii) N.M. (iii) S.L. (iv) D.F. (v) A.G. In particular, it is alleged that he submitted an account or charge for services that he knew was false or misleading; engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional Hearing Date: August 19-23, 2013

Member

Summary of Allegations

Organ, Harvey

As a result of a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Organ committed professional misconduct in that he was found guilty on June 30, 2010 of contravening the Ontario Drug Benefit Act, s. 15(1)(e); failed to report to the Registrar that he had been charged with offences under the Ontario Drug Benefit Act in April 2009 and/or that he had been found guilty of an offence under the Ontario Drug Benefit Act in June 2010; submitted false or incomplete information under the Ontario Drug Benefit Act or Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act on November 20, 2007; February 27, 2008; August 26, 2008 and/or March 17, 2009 regarding professional allowances paid to Kohler’s; submitted false or incorrect information in response to questions on the annual renewal application submitted to the College in January 2010 regarding the charges under the Ontario Drug Benefit Act in April 2009; submitted false or inaccurate information in response to questions on the annual renewal application submitted to the College in February 2011 regarding the finding of guilt in relation to the offence under the Ontario Drug Benefit Act, in June 2010; In particular, it is alleged that he was found guilty of offense relevant to his suitability to practise; contravened a term, condition or limitation imposed on his Certificate of Registration by O. Reg. 202/94 under the Pharmacy Act, 1991; failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession; falsified a record relating to his practice; signed or issued, in his professional capacity, a document that he knew contained a false or misleading statement; engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional. Hearing Date: TBA

Member

Summary of Allegations

Patel, Maheshkumar

As a result of a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Patel committed professional misconduct in that misappropriated narcotics and/or other drugs from the pharmacy on or about 10 occasions in or about June-November 2011; In particular, it is alleged that he failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession; contravened the Act, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, or the regulations under those Acts, and in particular, section 155 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4; contravened a federal or provincial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, sale or dispensing of any drug or mixture of drugs, and in particular, the Food and Drug Regulations, C.R.C., c. 870, as amended, sections C.01.041 and/or G.03.002; the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19, as amended, section 4; and/or the Narcotic Control Regulations, C.R.C. c.1041, as amended, section 31; engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional Hearing Date: June 27, 2013

Member

Summary of Allegations

Rak, Charles

As a result of a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Rak committed professional misconduct in that he was found guilty by Justice Polowin of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice of the following offences: using a computer to communicate with a person who was or was believed to be under the age of 14 years for the purpose of facilitating the commission of an offence under section 151 (sexual interference) or 152 (invitation to sexual touching) of the Criminal Code of Canada, contrary to section 172.1 of the Criminal Code of Canada (computer luring); touching, for a sexual purpose, with a part of his body, the body of a person under the age of 16 years, contrary to section 151 of the Criminal Code of Canada (sexual interference); without lawful authority and knowing that another person was harassed or recklessly as to whether that person was harassed, engaged in repeatedly communicating with, either directly or indirectly, that person, and caused that person to reasonably fear for his personal safety, contrary to section 264 of the Criminal Code (criminal harassment); eight (8) counts of failing, without lawful excuse, to comply with a condition in a recognizance, while being at large on a recognizance entered into before a Justice and being bound to comply with conditions thereof, contrary to section 145(3) of the Criminal Code (failure to comply with recognizance). In particular, it is alleged that he was found guilty of offences that are relevant to his suitability to practise; engaged in conduct or performed an act or acts relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regarding to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional Hearing Date: TBA

Member

Summary of Allegations

Rashid, Jamil

As a result of a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Rashid submitted false claims to third party payors including the Ontario Drug Benefit program, for products that were not prescribed and/or not received by patients, for one or more products; and/or recorded authorizations for prescriptions and/or refills of prescriptions where no such authorization was given, for one or more products; and/or recorded that products had been dispensed to patients pursuant to a prescription when the products were not received by the patients, for one or more products. In particular, it is alleged that he failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession; falsified records relating to his practice; submitted accounts or charges for services that he knew to be false or misleading; contravened, while engaged in the practice of pharmacy, a federal or provincial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, sale or dispensing of any drug or mixture of drugs, and in particular, sections 5 and 15(b) of the Ontario Drug Benefit Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.10, as amended, and/or Ontario Regulation 201/96 made thereunder; engaged in conduct or performed an act or acts relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regarding to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional. Hearing Date: TBA

Member

Summary of Allegations

Reich, Herman

As a result of a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Reich committed professional misconduct with respect to management of inventory of narcotics, controlled drugs and targeted substances under his control to prevent loss or theft, including failure to count and reconcile narcotics, controlled drugs and targeted substances at least every six months from on or about September 1, 2009 to on or about April 10, 2012; and/or management of inventory of narcotics under his control to prevent loss or theft, including failure to include methadone in counting and reconciliation of narcotics from on or about June 25, 2011 to on or about April 10, 2012; management of inventory of narcotics and controlled drugs under his control to prevent loss or theft, including failure to report destruction of narcotics and controlled drugs to the Office of Controlled Substances from on or about April 30, 2010 to on or about April 10, 2012. In particular, it is alleged that he failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession; contravened, while engaged in the practice of pharmacy, a federal or provincial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, sale or dispensing of any drug or mixture of drugs, and in particular s. 43 of the Narcotic Control Regulations, C.R.C., c. 1041, as amended, under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19, as amended, and/or s. G.03.012 of the Food and Drug Regulations, C.R.C., c. 870, as amended, to the Food and Drugs Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-27, as amended, and/or s. 7(1)(a) of the Benzodiazapines and Other Targeted Substances Regulations, S.O.R./2000-271 under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19, as amended; engaged in conduct or performed an act or acts relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regarding to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional. Hearing Date: TBA

Member

Summary of Allegations

Samwaiel, Sherif

As a result of a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Samwaiel committed professional misconduct in that he falsified pharmacy records relating to his practice in connection with: claims made for various drugs in 2008-2010 various invoices purporting to be from Canadian Pharmaceutical Supply in 2009-2010 the Statement of Accounts payable at November 30, 2010 for Mr. M.K. signed or issued, in his professional capacity, a document that he knew contained a false or misleading statement in connection with claims made for various drugs in 2008-2010; In particular, it is alleged that he failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession; falsified a record relating to his practice; signed or issued, in his professional capacity, a document that he knew contained a false or misleading statement; submitted an account or charge for services that he knew was false or misleading; contravened the Act, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, or the regulations under those Acts, and in particular, sections 155 and 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, as amended; contravened a federal or provincial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, sale or dispensing of any drug or mixture of drugs, and in particular, sections 5, 6 and 15(1) of the Ontario Drug Benefits Act, R.S.O. 1990, c O.10, and section 25 of Regulation 201/96 under the Ontario Drug Benefits Act; engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional Hearing Date: TBA

Member

Summary of Allegations

Savji, Shaffique

As a result of a referral by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, it is alleged that Mr. Savji committed professional misconduct in that he sexually abused a patient, L.G., in or about July 2009; dispensed a narcotic, Hydromorph Contin 3mg, to a patient, L.G., in excess of the amount prescribed and in exchange for sexual favours, in or about July 2009; and/or failed to take all reasonable steps necessary to protect narcotics at the pharmacy against loss or theft and, in particular, failed to maintain accurate inventories and other records of narcotics purchased by and dispensed at the pharmacy and/or failed to report loss or theft of narcotics, in or about 2009-2010. In particular, it is alleged that he: sexually abused a patient with inappropriate comment and/or physical contact, at the pharmacy and/or the patient’s home, in or about July 2009; failed to maintain the standards of practice of the profession; dispensed or sold drugs for an improper purpose; contravened the Pharmacy Act, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, or the regulations under those Acts, and in particular, sections 155(1) of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, as amended, , and/or sections 63-64 of Regulation 551 under that Act, as amended; contravened a federal or provincial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, sale or dispensing of any drug or mixture of drugs, and in particular, section c.01.041(1.1) of the Food and Drug Regulations, C.R.C., c. 870, as amended, to the Food and Drugs Act, R.S.C. 1985, c.F-27, as amended, and/or sections 42 and/or 43 of the Narcotic Control Regulations, C.R.C., c.1041, as amended, under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19, as amended; knowingly permitted the premises in which a pharmacy was located to be used for unlawful purposes; engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional Hearing Date: TBA