Court Backs the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board in Cataract Complaint Dispute

The applicant sought judicial review of the Decision of the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board (“HPARB”), which upheld the Decision of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (the “College”) in relation to a complaint pertaining to a rare complication which occurred following the applicant’s cataract surgery. The primary basis for the applicant’s application was that the College had failed to determine liability or causation for the poor outcome of his surgery. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed the application, finding the HPARB Decision was reasonable and there was no basis to intervene.

Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Health Professions Appeal and Review Board – Judicial intervention – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness.

Leigh v. Goldhar, [2025] O.J. No. 4034, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, September 17, 2025, N.L. Backhouse, S. Shore and K.C. Tranquilli JJ.

The applicant, Mr. Leigh, sought judicial review of the Decision of the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board (“HPARB”), which upheld the Decision of the Inquiries, Complaints, and Reports Committee (the “Committee”) of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (the “College”). Mr. Leigh’s initial complaint to the College was related to a rare but known complication which occurred after he underwent cataract surgery of the left eye, performed by ophthalmologist Dr. Goldhar.

Mr. Leigh was referred to Dr. Goldhar in 2021 for blurred vision. Dr. Goldhar performed cataract surgeries on Mr. Leigh on October 28, 2021 (right eye), and November 18, 2021 (left eye). On November 26, 2021, Mr. Leigh presented to Dr. Goldhar and was diagnosed with endophthalmitis in his left eye. Dr. Goldhar immediately referred Mr. Leigh to a retinal specialist who performed surgery on that same day. Mr. Leigh subsequently developed corneal inflammation and a detached retina and was referred to a corneal specialist in February 2022. Mr. Leigh elected to not proceed with further surgery as there was a poor prognosis for recovery of his vision.

The Committee concluded the complaint without criticism and had no concerns with Dr. Goldhar’s management of the case. Mr. Leigh argued before the HPARB that the Committee’s investigation was inadequate and the decision to take no further action was unreasonable. The HPARB dismissed the appeal. The primary basis for the applicant’s application was that the College had failed to determine liability or causation for the poor outcome of his surgery. The HPARB found that the Committee does not determine liability or causation, and its function is not to punish physicians but rather to screen complaints about its members and determine if remedial action or other disciplinary measure is warranted.

The standard of review of the merits of the HPARB decision is reasonableness. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed the application, finding the HPARB Decision was reasonable and there was no basis to intervene.

This case was digested by Claire Shanna of Harper Grey LLP.  If you would like to discuss this case further, please feel free to contact her directly at [email protected].