Discipline Decisions (August 2026)

Notice of Hearing #1

The Panel found that Sina Salehi committed professional misconduct with respect to the following incidents: 

• While engaged in the practice of pharmacy as Designated Manager at Doctors Pharmacy in Scarborough, Ontario (“Doctors Scarborough”), and/or as a shareholder and/or director of the corporation that operated the pharmacy,
  1. between about January 1, 2019, and January 15, 2021, he diverted (or permitted, consented to, or approved, expressly or impliedly, the diversion of) prescription drugs to unauthorized recipients and/or sources, with respect to certain identified prescription drugs; 
  2. between about January 1, 2019, and January 15, 2021, he submitted (or permitted, consented to, or approved, expressly or impliedly, the submission of) false or unsubstantiated claims for drugs and/or products that were not dispensed, with respect to certain identified drugs and/or products; 
  3. between about January 1, 2019, and January 15, 2021, he dispensed (or permitted, consented to, or approved, expressly or impliedly, the dispensing of) prescription drugs without valid authorization, with respect to certain identified prescriptions; 
  4. between about January 1, 2019, and January 15, 2021, he failed to ensure that inventory reconciliations of narcotics and controlled substances were performed at least once every six months, and/or he failed to ensure that records of such reconciliations were retained as required; 
  5. between about January 1, 2019, and January 15, 2021, he failed to report the loss or theft of narcotics as required by s. 42 of the Narcotic Control Regulations made under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, and/or he failed to take all reasonable steps necessary to protect narcotics on his premises or under his control against loss or theft as required by s. 43 of the Narcotic Control Regulations made under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act; 

• While engaged in the practice of pharmacy as Designated Manager at Doctors Pharmacy in Thornhill, Ontario (“Doctors Thornhill”), and/or as a shareholder and/or director of the corporation that operated the pharmacy, 
  1. between about April 1, 2019, and January 15, 2021, he diverted (or permitted, consented to, or approved, expressly or impliedly, the diversion of) prescription drugs to unauthorized recipients and/or sources, with respect to certain identified prescription drugs; 
  2. between about April 1, 2019, and January 15, 2021, he submitted (or permitted, consented to, or approved, expressly or impliedly, the submission of) false or unsubstantiated claims for drugs and/or products that were not dispensed, with respect to certain identified drugs and/or products; 
  3. between about April 1, 2019, and January 15, 2021, he dispensed (or permitted, consented to, or approved, expressly or impliedly, the dispensing of) prescription drugs without valid authorization, with respect to certain identified prescriptions; 
  4. between about April 1, 2019, and January 15, 2021, he failed to ensure that inventory reconciliations of narcotics and controlled substances were performed at least once every six months, and/or he failed to ensure that records of such reconciliations were retained as required; 
  5. between about April 1, 2019, and January 15, 2021, he failed to report the loss or theft of narcotics as required by s. 42 of the Narcotic Control Regulations made under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, and/or he failed to take all reasonable steps necessary to protect narcotics on his premises or under his control against loss or theft as required by s. 43 of the Narcotic Control Regulations made under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act; 

• While engaged in the practice of pharmacy at Neighbour’s Drug Mart in Thornhill, Ontario (“Neighbour’s Drug Mart”), and/or as a shareholder and/or director of the corporation that operated the pharmacy,
  1. between about August 4, 2020, and January 15, 2021, he diverted (or permitted, consented to, or approved, expressly or impliedly, the diversion of) prescription drugs to unauthorized recipients and/or sources, with respect to certain identified prescription drugs; 
  2. between about August 4, 2020, and January 15, 2021, he submitted (or permitted, consented to, or approved, expressly or impliedly, the submission of) false or unsubstantiated claims for drugs and/or products that were not dispensed, with respect to certain identified drugs and/or products; 
  3. between about August 4, 2020, and January 15, 2021, he failed to report the loss or theft of narcotics as required by s. 42 of the Narcotic Control Regulations made under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, and/or he failed to take all reasonable steps necessary to protect narcotics on his premises or under his control against loss or theft as required by s. 43 of the Narcotic Control Regulations made under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act; 

In particular, the Panel found that he: 

• Failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession;
• Failed to keep records as required respecting his patients or practice; 
• Falsified a record relating to his practice or a person’s health record; 
• Submitted an account or charge for services or products that he knew or ought to have known contained a false or misleading statement; 
• Contravened the Pharmacy Act, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, the Narcotics Safety and Awareness Act, 2010, the Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act or the Ontario Drug Benefit Act or the regulations under those Acts: 
  • s. 155 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act 
• Contravened a federal, provincial or territorial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, purchase, sale, or dispensing or prescribing of any drug or product, the administering of any substance, or the piercing of the dermis: 
  • s. C.01.041 of the Food and Drug Regulations, CRC, c 870, made under the Food and Drugs Act 
  • s. 42 and/or s. 43 of the Narcotic Control Regulations made under the Controlled Drugs and Substances 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 as disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional. 

Notice of Hearing #2 

The Panel found that Sina Salhi committed professional misconduct while engaged in the practice of pharmacy as Designated Manager and/or dispensing pharmacist at Neighbour’s Drug Mart in Thornhill, Ontario (the “Pharmacy”), and/or as a shareholder and/or director of the corporation that operated the Pharmacy, with respect to the following incidents: 

• Between about August 4, 2020 and July 31, 2021, he submitted (or in his capacity as Designated Manager of the Pharmacy and/or a shareholder and/or a director of the corporation that operated the Pharmacy he was responsible for the submission of) claims for drugs and/or products that were not dispensed, with respect to certain identified drugs and/or products; and/or
• He submitted (or in his capacity as Designated Manager of the Pharmacy and/or a shareholder and/or a director of the corporation that operated the Pharmacy he was responsible for the submission of) claims to the Ontario Drug Benefit Program that were not eligible to be paid, with respect to certain identified claims.  

In particular, the Panel found 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 or a person’s health record; 
• Signed or issued, in his professional capacity, a document that he knew or ought to have known contained a false or misleading statement; 
• Submitted an account or charge for services or products that he knew or ought to have known was false or misleading;
• Contravened the Pharmacy Act, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, the Narcotics Safety and Awareness Act, 2010, the Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act or the Ontario Drug Benefit Act or the regulations under those Acts, and in particular he contravened ss. 5, 6, and/or 15(1)(b) of the Ontario Drug Benefits Act, RSO 1990, c O.10, 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 as disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional. 

Notice of Hearing #3 

The Panel found that Sina Salehi committed professional misconduct while engaged in the practice of pharmacy at Family Health Pharmacy Thunder Bay (“FHP Thunder Bay”) in Thunder Bay, Ontario, and/or as an owner (directly or indirectly including as an owner of a beneficial interest) in FHP Thunder Bay, and/or as the Designated Manager, or the person exercising the authority and responsibilities of the Designated Manager, of FHP Thunder Bay, with respect to the following incidents: 

• between about August 22, 2022 and November 7, 2022, he permitted, consented to or approved, expressly or impliedly, FHP Thunder Bay operating without a pharmacist being physically present;
• between about August 22, 2022 and November 7, 2022, he permitted, consented to or approved, expressly or impliedly, the sale and/or dispensing of drugs at FHP Thunder Bay while no pharmacist was physically present; 
• between about November 8, 2022 and January 17, 2023, he permitted, consented to or approved, expressly or impliedly, FHP Thunder Bay operating with no Designated Manager; 
• on or about January 17, 2023, he closed (or caused and/or participated in the closure of) FHP Thunder Bay, without complying with the requirements for closing a pharmacy and for retaining records, and in particular: 
  1. he did not submit a pharmacy closing statement to the Registrar within the time required and/or at all, as required by s. 141 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, RSO 1990, c H.4; 
  2. he did not comply with the requirements of s. 157(2) of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, RSO 1990, c H.4 relating to the delivery of prescriptions; and/or 
  3. he did not comply with the requirements of ss. 20 and 21 of O. Reg. 264/16 made under the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, RSO 1990, c H.4 relating to the retention of records; 
• on or about at least November 8, 2022, he failed to ensure that FHP Thunder Bay contained equipment that was fit for the purpose of storing drugs and other medication, notably a working refrigerator; 
• between about February 16, 2021 and January 17, 2023, he failed to ensure that narcotic counts and/or reconciliations were completed at least every six months at FHP Thunder Bay, and/or that records of such counts and/or reconciliations were retained; 
• on or about November 8, 2022, he attempted to mislead an Ontario College of Pharmacists investigator by claiming to have worked as a pharmacist at FHP Thunder Bay on August 31, 2022, when he knew that he had not; 
• between about January 1, 2022 and January 17, 2023, he diverted (or permitted, consented to, or approved, expressly or impliedly, the diversion of) Apo-Oxycodone CR 40mg and/or Apo-Oxycodone CR 80mg to unauthorized recipients and/or sources; 
• between about August 22, 2022 and January 17, 2023, he diverted (or permitted, consented to, or approved, expressly or impliedly, the diversion of) Teva-Oxycocet 5/325mg to unauthorized recipients and/or sources 

The Panel further found that Sina Salehi, while engaged in the practice of pharmacy at Neighbour’s Drug Mart (“Neighbour’s”) in Thornhill, Ontario, and/or as Designated Manager of Neighbour’s and/or as a shareholder and/or director of the corporation that operated, committed professional misconduct with respect to the following incidents: 

• between about October 27, 2022 and August 1, 2023, he closed (or caused and/or participated in the closure of) Neighbour’s, without complying with the requirements for closing a pharmacy on a temporary basis, and in particular:
  1. he did not take adequate steps to provide notice to the public of the closure, of alternate pharmacies, of emergency contacts, and of other information that would facilitate continuity of care, including by failing to post one or more signs at Neighbour’s for the duration of the closure, failing to provide accurate information to callers to the pharmacy, and/or failing to update the pharmacy’s website and/or Google profile; 
  2. he did not comply with the requirements of ss. 20 and 21 of O. Reg. 264/16 made under the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, RSO 1990, c H.4 relating to the retention of records; 
• on or about August 1, 2023, he closed (or caused and/or participated in the closure of) Neighbour’s, without complying with the requirements for closing a pharmacy and for retaining records, and in particular: 
  1. he did not submit a pharmacy closing statement to the Registrar within the time required and/or at all, as required by s. 141 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, RSO 1990, c H.4;
  2. he did not comply with the requirements of s. 157(2) of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, RSO 1990, c H.4 relating to the delivery of prescriptions; and/or 
• between about September 16, 2022 and July 14, 2023, he diverted (or permitted, consented to, or approved, expressly or impliedly, the diversion of) drugs, including prescription drugs, narcotics, controlled drugs, and targeted substances, to unauthorized recipients and/or sources, with respect to all drugs purchased by Neighbour’s during that period 

In particular, the Panel found that he: 

• Failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession;
• Failed to keep records as required respecting his patients or practice;
• Contravened the Act, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, the Narcotics Safety and Awareness Act, 2010, the Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act or the Ontario Drug Benefit Act or the regulations under those Acts, and in particular:
  • sections 141, 146, 146(1.1), 149, 157 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act;
  • sections 18(2), 19(f)(i), 20 and 21 of O. Reg. 264/16 made under the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act;
• Contravened a federal, provincial or territorial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, purchase, sale, or dispensing or prescribing of any drug or product, the administering of any substance, or the piercing of the dermis, and in particular: 
  • section C.01.041 of the Food and Drug Regulations, CRC, c 870, made under the Food and Drugs Act;
  • sections 42 and 43 of the Narcotic Control Regulations made under the Controlled Drugs and Substances 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 as disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional. 
   

Following submissions with respect to the Order to be imposed on June 5, 2026, the Panel imposed an Order, as follows: 

1. A reprimand
2. Directing the Registrar to immediately revoke the Registrant’s Certificate of Registration  
3. Costs to the College in the amount of $20,000. 

In its reprimand, the Panel noted that the Registrant failed to maintain the responsibilities and obligations expected of him as a member of the profession of pharmacy. He engaged in conduct that reflects poorly on himself and the profession, and he failed to live up to the standards that are expected of him by the profession and the public. 

The Panel indicated that the Registrant’s actions to defraud a publicly funded program is inexcusable, and that it was appalled that the College’s investigations revealed a pharmacy practice that was beyond deplorable. The Panel expressed its view that the investigations showed that the Registrant has a total lack of understanding of the very basics of pharmacy practice, and that he failed the public of Ontario in the operation of his three pharmacies and in his billings to the Ontario Drug Benefits program, which he could not justify. 

The Panel related that it was aghast that the Registrant could invest so much time and energy in the study of pharmacy and in meeting the requirements of the Ontario College of Pharmacists to become a pharmacist, and that he would “throw all this to the wind” in favour of reaping the monetary benefits of his fraudulent activities. 

The Panel noted that the Registrant has undertaken to never engage in the practice of pharmacy in any capacity again, and to never apply for reinstatement of his licence at the Ontario College of Pharmacists or any other pharmacy licensing body in Canada. This will no doubt serve to protect the public who the registrants of this College serve every day in their practice. 

• Submitted claims for payment to the Ontario Drug Benefit Program for MedsChecks that were never conducted and/or were non-compliant with the requirements set forth by the Ministry of Health;
• Falsified records relating to MedsChecks; and/or;
• Failed to keep records and/or documentation as required for MedsChecks. 

In particular, the Panel found that the Registrant: 

• Failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession; 
• Failed to keep records as required respecting her patients and/or practice; 
• Falsified a record relating to her practice and/or a person’s health record; 
• Signed and/or issued, in her professional capacity, a document that she knew or ought to have known contained a false and/or misleading statement; 
• Submitted an account and/or charge for services and/or products that she knew or ought to have known was false and/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 as dishonourable and unprofessional. 

The Panel imposed an Order, as follows: 

1. A reprimand;
2. Directing the Registrar to suspend the Registrant’s certificate of registration for a period of 7 months. The suspension shall commence on June 30, 2026, at the conclusion of the hearing and run without interruption until January 29, 2027, inclusive. 
3. Directing the Registrar to impose specified terms, conditions or limitations on the Registrant’s certificate of registration, including: 
   1. The Registrant shall successfully complete, at her own expense, and within 12 months of the date of this Order, the ProBE Program on Professional/Problem Based Ethics for Healthcare Professionals with an unconditional pass; 
   2. In the alternative to 3(a), the Registrant shall successfully complete, at her own expense, a remediation program with Gail E. Siskind Consulting Services or another ethics consultant approved by the College, focusing on the issues raised by the facts and findings of professional misconduct in this case. The remediation program shall include the following terms: 
      1. Within 30-days of the decision in this matter, the Registrant shall retain the ethics consultant at her own expense; 
      2. The ethics consultant and the Registrant shall meet for the purpose of remediation of the concerns raised by the facts and findings of professional misconduct in this case. The total number of sessions between the ethics consultant and the Registrant will be at the sole discretion of the ethics consultant, but shall be no less than 3; 
      3. The manner of attendance at the sessions (e.g., in person, via videoconference, etc.) is a matter to be discussed in advance between the Registrant and the consultant, but shall ultimately be at the discretion of the consultant; 
      4. The Registrant shall provide the ethics consultant with the following documents related to this proceeding: 
         1. a copy of the Agreed Statement of Facts; 
         2. a copy of this Joint Submission on Order; and 
         3. a copy of the Decision and Reasons of the Discipline Panel, when available. 
      5. The Registrant shall develop a learning plan with the ethics consultant to comprehensively address the remediation required; 
      6. The Registrant shall demonstrate to the ethics consultant that she has successfully achieved all of the goals of the learning plan. Successful completion of the learning plan includes, but is not limited to, an essay acceptable to the College, which shall address the professional misconduct issues arising in this case; and 
      7. The essay shall be at least 1,000 words in length and the Registrant shall be responsible for the cost of the essay’s review by the ethics consultant to assist the Registrar to determine whether the essay is acceptable, up to a maximum of $500; and 
      8. The Registrant shall require the ethics consultant to report the results of the remediation program to the College within 3 months of the date of this Order. Such report shall include, but is not limited to, the ethics consultant’s assessment of the Registrant’s success in meeting the goals of the learning plan. 
   3. For a period of three years following the date the suspension in paragraph 2 of this Order ends, the Registrant shall be prohibited from acting as the Designated Manager of any pharmacy; 
   4. For a period of three years following the date the suspension in paragraph 2 of this Order ends, the Registrant shall be prohibited from having a proprietary interest in a pharmacy of any kind and/or receiving remuneration for her work as a pharmacist other than remuneration on an hourly or weekly basis; and, 
   5. For a period of three years following the date the suspension in paragraph 2 of this Order ends, the Registrant:
      1. shall be required to notify the College in writing of the names(s), address(s) and telephone numbers(s) of all employer(s) within seven days of commencing employment in a pharmacy, including employment as a relief pharmacist or other short-term employment; 
      2. shall provide any pharmacy employer with a copy of the Discipline Committee Panel’s decision in this matter and its Order; and 
      3. shall only engage in the practice of pharmacy for an employer who agrees to write to the College within seven days of the Registrant commencing employment, confirming that ii has received a copy of the required documents identified in subparagraph 3(b)(iv) and confirming the nature of the Registrant’s remuneration. 

4. Costs to the College in the amount of $10,000. 

In its reprimand, the Panel noted that the Registrant admitted to submitting claims for payment to the Ontario Drug Benefit Program for MedsCheck services that were never conducted or were not compliant with Ministry of Health requirements. She also admitted to falsifying records relating to MedsChecks and failing to keep records and documentation as required. Her conduct was repeated and involved dishonesty.  

The Panel observed that by engaging in this misconduct, the Registrant demonstrated a serious and persistent disregard for her professional obligations.  

The Panel pointed out that the Order contains important remediation and rehabilitation measures. The Registrant must take these measures seriously, learn from them, and apply them to her practice.  She must ensure that this conduct is never repeated and that, going forward, her professional practice consistently meets the standards expected of a member of the profession. 

• Misappropriated controlled substances from pharmacy inventory: in particular, Oxycodone, Oxycocet, Adderall, and/or Hydrocodone; 
• Falsified prescription records in respect of Oxycodone, Oxycocet, Adderall, and/or Hydrocodone.  

In particular, the Panel found that Mr. Patel: 

• Was found guilty of an offence relevant to his suitability to practise, namely theft under $5000 contrary to s. 334(b) of the Criminal Code of Canada;
• Failed to maintain the standards of practice of the profession;
• Contravened s. 155 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-4, as amended;
• Contravened a federal law with respect to the distribution, purchase, sale, or dispensing or prescribing of any drug or product: in particular s. 4(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19;
• 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 and unprofessional.  

After hearing submissions with respect to the Order to be imposed on May 27, 2025, the Panel issued its Order in a decision dated July 20, 2026. 

The Panel imposed an Order as follows: 

1. A reprimand, in writing; 

2. That the Registrant’s Certificate of Registration be revoked; 

3. Costs to the College in the amount of $10,000. 

In its reprimand, the Panel noted that Mr. Patel is no longer a member of the honourable profession of pharmacy. Integrity, trust and professional conduct are the core of the practice of pharmacy and the delivery of the care to the public. In return, the profession is held in high regard by the people of Ontario.  

The Panel observed that pharmacy is a self-regulated profession and, as such, it bears the responsibility to ensure that it maintains the trust of its members and the public it serves. The practice of pharmacy is a privilege that carries with it significant obligations to the public, the profession, and to oneself.  

The Panel indicated that Mr. Patel’s conduct demonstrated flagrant disregard for the privilege of practising pharmacy.  Theft of narcotics and controlled substances is antithetical to a pharmacy professional’s role and has the potential to be injurious and destructive to both individuals and the community at large.  

This Panel reiterated that it found Mr. Patel’s actions to be disgraceful, dishonorable and unprofessional. 

• He engaged in the following conduct toward his patient and co-worker [Name]:
  • Touching of a sexual nature; and/or
  • Behaviour and/or remarks of a sexual nature;  

• He harassed and/or sexually harassed his patient and co-worker [Name], including by:
  • Engaging in a course of vexatious comments or conduct that was known or ought reasonably to be known to be unwelcome; 
  • Making comments of a sexual nature; and/or 
  • Touching or attempting to touch her inappropriately.  

In particular, the Panel found that the Registrant: 

• Sexually abused his patient and co-worker [Name];
• Failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession;  
• 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 and unprofessional;  
• Engaged in conduct that is unbecoming of a member.  

After hearing submissions regarding the order to be made heard on January 14, 2025, the Panel imposed an order, as follows, in a decision dated April 10, 2025: 

1. A reprimand; 

2. That the Registrar shall be directed to revoke the Registrant’s certificate of registration; 

3. That the Registrant reimburse the College for funding provided to the Patient under the program required under section 85.7 of the Code, and shall post an irrevocable letter of credit or other security acceptable to the College to guarantee payment of such amounts within 30 days of the date that the Panel’s Order becomes final, in the amount of $17,370.00; and 

4. Costs to the College in the amount of $100,000. 

In its reprimand, the Panel noted that the Registrant’s misconduct is among the most serious misconduct that a member of this College may commit. As a pharmacist, the Registrant was entrusted with the responsibility to uphold the highest standards of professionalism, ethics, and care. He failed in this regard. 

The Panel explained that the Registrant’s conduct violated the trust placed in him by his patients, the public and the profession. The Panel finds his conduct both troubling and unacceptable. 

The Panel observed that the Registrant’s conduct not only harmed his patient but also undermined the public trust in the pharmacy profession. He failed to maintain the responsibilities and obligations expected of him as a member of the profession. 

The Panel indicated that the mandatory revocation of the Registrant’s Certificate of Registration reflects the seriousness of his misconduct and Ontario’s zero tolerance policy towards the sexual abuse of patients. 

The Panel expressed its expectation that the Registrant will reflect deeply on the gravity of his actions and the harm they have caused, and that he will take this opportunity to understand the consequences of his actions and learn from his mistakes.  

Notice of Hearing #1 

The Panel found that Mohammad (Vahid) Khezerzadeh, while engaged in the practice of pharmacy at Thornhill Drug Mart in Thornhill, Ontario (the “Pharmacy”), and/or as the Designated Manager of the Pharmacy, and/or as a director and/or shareholder of the corporation that operated the Pharmacy committed professional misconduct in that he: 

• processed at the Pharmacy certain identified prescriptions for opioid agonist therapy medication directed to be dispensed at a different pharmacy, thereby creating false dispensing records at the Pharmacy;
• failed to ensure that a pharmacist signed a patient log sheet on each occasion where a patient was dispensed observed and/or carry doses of opioid agonist therapy medication;
• on or about December 19, 2024, falsified a patient log sheet for Patient […] by signing and/or initialing as the observing pharmacist for dates earlier than December 19, 2024;
• failing to take steps to verify, or to document having taken steps to verify, a patient’s last dose of opioid agonist therapy medication, with respect to the following patients and prescriptions:
  • Rx issued on December 11, 2024 for patient […];
  • Rx issued on December 19, 2024 for patient […]; 
  • Rx issued on November 10, 2024 for patient […]; 
  • Rx issued on October 3, 2024 for patient […]; 
• signed prescription hardcopies later than the time at which he performed therapeutic and/or technical checks of the prescriptions, and/or without having performed therapeutic and/or technical checks of the prescriptions, for certain identified prescriptions;
• failed to maintain copies of prescriptions as required by s. 156(2) of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act and/or s. 20 of O. Reg. 264/16 made under that Act for certain identified prescriptions. 

In particular, the Panel found that he: 

• Failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession;
• Failed to keep records as required respecting his patients or practice;
• Falsified a record relating to his practice or a person’s health record;
• Contravened the Act, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, the Narcotics Safety and Awareness Act, 2010, the Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act or the Ontario Drug Benefit Act or the regulations under those Acts, and in particular:
  • s. 156(2) of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act and/or 
  • s. 20 of O. Reg. 264/16 made under the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation 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 as dishonourable and unprofessional. 

Notice of Hearing #2 

The Panel found that Mohammad (Vahid) Khezerzadeh, while engaged in the practice of pharmacy at Thornhill Drug Mart in Thornhill, Ontario (the “Pharmacy”), and/or as the Designated Manager of the Pharmacy, and/or as a director and/or shareholder of the corporation that operated the Pharmacy committed professional misconduct with respect to the following: 

• on or about December 19, 2024, he permitted, consented to or approved, expressly or impliedly, the Pharmacy operating without a pharmacist being physically present, contrary to s. 146 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act;
• on or about December 19, 2024, he permitted, consented to or approved, expressly or impliedly, the sale and/or dispensing of drugs, including but not limited to certain identified prescriptions, while no pharmacist was physically present, contrary to s. 149(1) of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act and s. C.01.041 of the Food and Drug Regulations, CRC, c 870, made under the Food and Drugs Act;
• on or about December 19, 2024, he permitted, consented to or approved, expressly or impliedly, the sale and/or dispensing of drugs, including but not limited to certain identified prescriptions identified in Schedule A, and/or including, opioid agonist therapy (“OAT”) medications, without a pharmacist verifying the doses and/or witnessing the doses required to be witnessed;
• on or about December 12, 2024, he permitted, consented to or approved, expressly or impliedly, the sale and/or dispensing of opioid agonist therapy (“OAT”) medications without a pharmacist verifying the doses and/or witnessing the doses required to be witnessed. 

In particular, the Panel found that he: 

• Failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession;
• Contravened the Pharmacy Act, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, the Narcotics Safety and Awareness Act, 2010, the Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act or the Ontario Drug Benefit Act or the regulations under those Acts, and in particular, s. 146 and/or s, 149(1) of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act;
• Contravened a federal, provincial or territorial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, purchase, sale, or dispensing or prescribing of any drug or product, the administering of any substance, or the piercing of the dermis, and in particular, s. C.01.041 of the Food and Drug Regulations, CRC, c 870, made under the Food and Drugs 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 as dishonourable and unprofessional. 

The Panel imposed an Order, as follows: 

1. A reprimand;
2. The Registrar shall suspend the Registrant’s Certificate of Registration for a period of 4 months, with 1 month of the suspension to be remitted on condition that the Registrant completes the remedial training as specified in paragraph 3a below. The suspension shall commence on September 13, 2026, and shall continue until December 12, 2026, inclusive. If the remitted portion of the suspension is required to be served by the Registrant because he fails to complete the remedial requirements specified in paragraph 3a, that portion of the suspension shall commence on September 13, 2027, and shall continue until October 12, 2027, inclusive. If the time for completing the remedial steps above is extended by the Registrar, the date on which the remitted portion of the suspension shall commence, if required, shall be adjusted accordingly.
3. The Registrar is directed to impose the following specified terms, conditions or limitations on the Registrant’s Certificate of Registration:
   1. The Registrant shall successfully complete within twelve (12) months of the date of the Order, a course with Gail E. Siskind Consulting Services, or another professional ethics consultant approved by the College, to address the professional misconduct arising from this matter, to be designed by the consultant. The following terms shall apply to the course: 
      1. The number of sessions shall be at the discretion of the consultant, but shall be no fewer than three; 
      2. The manner of attendance at the sessions (e.g., in person, via videoconference, etc.) is a matter to be discussed in advance between the Registrant and the consultant, but shall ultimately be at the discretion of the consultant; 
      3. The Registrant shall be responsible for the cost of the course; 
      4. The Registrant shall provide to the consultant the following documents, in advance of the course, to facilitate the design of the course: 
         1. A copy of the Notice of Hearing, the Agreed Statement of Facts, and this Joint Submission on Order, or 
         2. A copy of the Panel’s Decision and Reasons, once available. 
      5. Successful completion of the course includes completion of an essay acceptable to the Registrar, which essay shall address the professional misconduct issues arising in this case; 
      6. essay shall be at least 1,000 words in length and the Registrant shall be responsible for the cost of the essay’s review by the consultant to assist the Registrar to determine whether the essay is acceptable, up to a maximum of $500; and 
      7. The Registrant shall direct the consultant to report the results of the ethics course to the College, which report shall be made no later than thirteen (13) months from the date this Order becomes final, to confirm that the Registrant completed the course to the consultant’s satisfaction. 
   2. The Registrant shall not act as the Designated Manager of any pharmacy until at least May 18, 2028; 
   3. The Registrant shall not dispense methadone, suboxone, or other opioid agonist therapy medication until he successfully completes: 
      1. the Opioid Use Disorder Treatment Course delivered by CAMH in Toronto; 
      2. a practice mentorship program with an individual approved by the College that focuses on dispensing opioid agonist therapy medication; the following terms apply to the practice mentorship program: 
         1. Within 6 months of the date of this Order, the Registrant shall retain a practice mentor at his own expense; the Registrant may propose up to two potential practice mentors for the College’s approval in its sole discretion; if neither is approved by the College, or if, by 5 months from the date of this Order, the Registrant has not proposed two potential mentors, the College shall assign the Registrant a practice mentor who the Registrant shall retain; 
         2. The Registrant shall meet at least 3 times with the practice mentor for the purpose of reviewing the Registrant’s practice with respect to the dispensing of opioid agonist therapy medication; 
         3. The Registrant shall provide the practice mentor with the following documents related to this proceeding: 
            1. the Agreed Statement of Facts; 
            2. the Joint Submission on Order; and 
            3. the Panel’s Decision and Reasons if and when available; 
         4. The Registrant shall develop a learning plan with the mentor to comprehensively address the remediation required; 
         5. The Registrant shall demonstrate to the mentor that he has successfully achieved all of the goals of the learning plan; 
         6. The Registrant shall require the mentor to report the results of the Mentorship Program to the College in writing and at the Registrant’s expense no later than 13 months from the date of this Order. Such report shall include, but is not limited to: 
            1. the learning plan; and 
            2. the mentor’s assessment of the Registrant’s success in meeting the goals of the learning plan; 
   4. The Registrant shall ensure that any pharmacy in which he has a direct or indirect ownership interest does not engage in dispensing opioid agonist therapy medication unless the Designated Manager of the pharmacy, as well as any staff pharmacists who are engaging in the dispensing of opioid agonist therapy medication at the pharmacy, have completed the Opioid Use Disorder Treatment Course delivered by CAMH in Toronto; 
4. Costs to the College in the amount of $10,000. 

In its reprimand, the Panel noted that the Registrant engaged in several acts of professional misconduct, including failing to maintain the standards of practice of the profession by allowing the Pharmacy to operate in the absence of a pharmacist, failing to perform required verifications in connection with the dispensing of opioid agonist therapy medications, and failing to maintain required or accurate records. 

The Panel indicated that as a pharmacist, the Registrant is entrusted with the responsibility of upholding the highest standards of patient care, supervision, and compliance with regulatory requirements to ensure patient safety. He failed to meet those responsibilities. As a Director, Shareholder, and the Designated Manager of the Pharmacy, the Registrant had an obligation to actively manage the Pharmacy and was accountable for supervising its operations and ensuring compliance with the standards of practice. He failed to fulfill those obligations. 

The Panel related that the Registrant’s actions demonstrated a serious disregard for his professional responsibilities. 

The Panel expressed its expectation that the Registrant will treat the outcome of this Discipline hearing as an opportunity to reflect on his conduct, learn from his mistakes, and take the necessary steps to ensure that similar misconduct is not repeated in the future.