However, on Feb. 16, nine businesses days before the hearing, the college submitted “a 189-page application, referencing 43 case authorities and over 40 new documents, totaling in excess of a thousand pages,” Dr. Hoffe’s lawyer, Lee Turner, told The Epoch Times in an email.
Because he wouldn’t have proper time to review the materials, Mr. Turner asked for an adjournment, and the college agreed.
Mr. Turner said he was subsequently informed that the college had applied for judicial notice—a principle allowing judges to recognize certain commonly known information without the need to introduce it with supporting evidence.
“The College alleges that the facts they seek judicial notice of are so notoriously known and well accepted that no reasonable person would dispute them,” Mr. Turner wrote, adding, “The importance of such an application is obvious, as Dr. Hoffe disputes the facts alleged by the College.”
Dr. Hoffe told The Epoch Times that if the request is granted, he would have no defence, as “the fact that they’re applying for judicial notice means they are trying to block me from being able to defend myself.”
“If the disciplinary panel grants judicial notice, they are saying that all of the facts stated by the College are indisputable and there’s no debate,” he said, and thus, effectively, “there’s no trial, because I can’t give any defence.”
‘We’re Not Scientists’
Barry Bussey, a partner with law firm Bussey Ainsworth and president of the not-for-profit First Freedoms Foundation, said the rule of judicial notice has merit but its implementation should have a much higher standard than what he’s seen in recent years, especially regarding information related to the COVID-19 pandemic.“In Canada, we have yet to have a court that challenges the public health narrative that the government has been using,” he said.
Mr. Bussey said what’s most frustrating for him is that tribunals or courts “give a path to who they’ve determined are the experts” concerning COVID.
“We give deference to the experts they have, and what the courts have often said under the COVID regime is ‘We’re not scientists. We’re not physicians. We’re not public health. We are judges, and therefore, who are we to question the experts?’ And yet, judges do it all the time.”
In its ruling, the tribunal said it “relies on Health Canada regulatory approval of the COVID-19 vaccines as evidence of their safety and effectiveness,” adding that “judicial notice should be taken of regulatory approval, and regulatory approval is a strong indicator of safety and effectiveness.”
‘A Serious Issue’
However, in another COVID-19 vaccination case decided by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in August 2022, the judge said he was not comfortable accepting government information and opinion on COVID vaccines as safe and effective for children, and therefore, judicial notice could not be used.As part of his decision, Justice Corkery outlined how judicial notice regarding COVID vaccine safety had been taken in several court cases to date but refused in others.
“The issue before the court in taking judicial notice of scientific facts is not assessing whether the science is ‘fake science,’ but whether scientific facts that would normally require expert opinion to be admitted, may be judicially noticed without proof,” he wrote.
“The science relating to COVID-19 is developing. The ‘facts’ are changing,” he added, saying, “I am not prepared to take judicial notice of any government information with respect to COVID-19 or the COVID-19 vaccines.”
“I would expect that judicial notice needs to be applied robustly in either sense, especially when you’re prosecuting a doctor,” Mr. Moore told The Epoch Times.
‘Decisions Based Upon Ideology or Partisanship’
Leighton Grey, senior partner with Grey Wowk Spencer LLP, says he believes judicial notice has been overused in cases related to vaccines and government measures applied to the public.In emails to The Epoch Times, he described how he feels judicial notice has been misused and how Dr. Hoffe’s hearing may be challenging for the doctor.
“Judicial notice is where the court regards as proven a fact that could not possibly be disputed,” Mr. Grey wrote.
“Courts did this throughout the pandemic in relation to the government and mass media COVID narratives such as ‘vaccines are safe and effective.’ I am speaking of how courts repeatedly accepted the government narrative about COVID-19 and ‘vaccines,’ and that they continue to do so. Rather than being a Constitutional check upon government overreach, they became a branch of the administrative state.”
Noting that Dr. Hoffe has to first defend himself at an administrative tribunal, Mr. Grey said winning the battle against judicial notice is only his first hurdle.
“The other problem with administrative tribunals is that they are populated by persons appointed by government for their politics, so that they will render decisions based upon ideology or partisanship,” Mr. Grey said.
“It may very well be that Dr. Hoffe is dealing with just such a situation,” he added.
‘Consider Others More Important’
Dr. Hoffe says he began noticing patients experiencing severe adverse events from the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine injections at his practice in the rural town of Lytton, B.C., in early 2021, shortly after the vaccine rollout. He reported these reactions to other medical personnel in his community, but was quickly rebuked by Interior Health, the provincial health authority that oversees his area, and asked not to direct his concerns to his colleagues.The college alleged that he “contravened standards imposed under the Health Professions Act, including but not limited to the Canadian Medical Association’s Code of Ethics and Professionalism by publishing statements on social media and other digital platforms that were misleading, incorrect or inflammatory about vaccinations, treatments, and public measures relating to COVID-19.”
A fire in Lytton in June 2021 wiped out much of the town, including Dr. Hoffe’s medical clinic and the town’s emergency room. The doctor said he still has his practice and often has patients knock on his door for emergency treatment when they have nowhere else to go.
He keeps basic supplies available in his home, but until he knows whether he will face any discipline, he hasn’t spent money on more expensive equipment.
“I know God will provide. I am not the focus of my life and that makes a huge difference,” Dr. Hoffe said.
“I’ve always tried to live my life considering others more important than myself, and that is what I did right from the beginning. That I was willing to risk harm to myself in order to protect my patients. That is the Christian ethic, to consider others more important.”
