Supreme Court strikes ‘profoundly deficient’ lawsuit brought by Fort St. John doctor

FORT ST. JOHN, B.C. — The B.C. Supreme Court has dismissed a Fort St. John doctor’s lawsuit against healthcare bosses after ruling it was “profoundly deficient.”

In an October 30th oral verdict, published on November 20th, Justice David Crerar granted the defence application to strike Dr. Qasim Hameed Afridi’s July 2020-filed lawsuit against Northern Health and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of BC. 

Afridi’s lawsuit alleged bad faith, discrimination, harassment, defamation and constructive dismissal.

“The plaintiff’s failure to meticulously comply with Justice (Ian) Caldwell’s last‑chance order is sufficient in itself to deny the plaintiff’s application and grant those of the defendants,” Crerar said.

Pakistan and Ireland-trained Afridi specializes in psychiatry. He migrated to B.C. in 2016, settled in Fort St. John and began practicing as a provisionally licensed psychiatrist.

However, he had conflicts with Northern Health-recommended supervisors and other medical practitioners and became the subject of complaints to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of BC.

In turn, Afridi complained about his supervisors and colleagues.

Northern Health convinced him not to resign in early 2018 and he continued to practice under conditions.

But, during a May 2018 meeting with one of the doctors, Afridi responded “angrily and made comments of a threatening nature,” Crerar said.

Northern Health informed Afridi in a July 2018 letter that he would no longer be sponsored as a provisionally-licensed psychiatrist as of the end of September that year.

“This decision was based on the plaintiff’s conduct with his supervisors,” said Crerar. “There were no more qualified local physicians who were willing to supervise the plaintiff.”

Afridi filed the lawsuit in 2020, but more than five years passed and there has been little progress.

“Lists of documents have been exchanged,” Crerar said. “One witness has been discovered. No trial date has been set.”

Crerar’s decision said Afridi sought to file a second amended notice of civil claim. Last May, Caldwell deemed Afridi’s pleadings “unfocussed, rambling, prolix and, in some particulars, they refer to claims not properly founded in or known to law in B.C.”

Caldwell gave Afridi one more chance, but Crerar called the pleadings profoundly deficient, unable to be addressed by an obvious or straightforward amendment and without merit. Additionally, many of the claims within it are beyond the two-year limitation period.

“The only just result is to strike the claim without leave to amend, and to deny the plaintiff yet another chance to provide a proper pleading,” Crerar said.