The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Manitoba

Home

Coming Events

ICAM Members' Handbook

Site Search

Use Member Login to register for events, pay your membership fees on-line, and update your membership profile information quickly and easily.

Protecting the Public
The Disciplinary Process

Appeals
Complainants who are dissatisfied the decision of the Professional Conduct Committee not to pursue a complaint may request a review of the decision by a separate Complaint Review Panel.

Appeals to Complaint Review Panel

The request for appeal must clearly state the reason for the appeal, such as new information not previously considered or the reasons why the complainant believes that the Professional Conduct Committee erred in its decision.

The Complaint Review Panel follows a process similar to that of the Professional Conduct Committee in terms of information gathering.

The Panel can agree with, vary, or quash a decision of the Professional Conduct Committee.

Members and students have the opportunity to appeal the decision of the Discipline Committee to either Council or directly to the Court of Queen’s Bench. Appeals may also be made to both, first to Council followed by the Court of Queen’s Bench.

Appeals to Council

Appeals to Council must:

be made within 10 days of the date of service of the decision and order

include reasons for the appeal, a bond equal to the lesser of one-half of any fine that was ordered by the Discipline Committee or $5000 and a confirmation with respect to the submission of transcripts of the original hearing

be heard by at least five members of council
The appeal may be a request for a “re-trial” or it may be an appeal of a specific portion of the decision and order of the Discipline Committee.

The appeal is conducted in the same manner and with the same rules and procedures as those governing a disciplinary hearing.

Appeals to Court of Queen’s Bench

Appeals to Court of Queen’s Bench must be made within 90 days of the date of the order.

In most cases, such appeals are heard to determine whether or not the process followed by the Institute was fair and are not intended to be a re-trial of the facts of the case.