What is the range of penalties available to the Law Society of BC for gross misconduct in a medical malpractice case?

A non-exhaustive list of factors to be considered in assessing penalty is set out in the 1999 decision Law Society of BC v. Ogilvie, [1999] LSBC 17, as follows: (a) the nature and gravity of the conduct proven; (b) the age and experience of the respondent; (c) the previous character of the respondent, including details of prior discipline; (d) the impact upon the victim; (e) the advantage gained, or to be gained, by the respondent; (f) the number of times the offending conduct occurred; (g) whether the respondent has acknowledged the misconduct and taken steps to disclose and redress the wrong and the presence of absence or other mitigating circumstances; (h) the possibility of remediating or rehabilitating the respondent; (i) the impact upon the respondent of criminal or other sanctions or penalties; (j) the impact of the proposed penalty on the respondent; (k) the need for specific and general deterrence; (l) the need to ensure the public’s confidence in the integrity of the profession; and (m) the range of penalties imposed in similar cases.