A former Windsor pharmacist, Emanuele Buttice, has permanently resigned from the profession and agreed to never own or work in a pharmacy in Ontario again, bringing an indefinite halt to a discipline proceeding that involved serious allegations of professional misconduct. The Discipline Committee of the Ontario College of Pharmacists agreed to adjourn the case of Ontario (College of Pharmacists) v. Buttice, 2025 ONCPDC 10 (CanLII) on April 28, 2025, after Mr. Buttice signed a formal undertaking that effectively ends his career in pharmacy.
The resolution avoids a formal hearing into allegations that spanned from January 2016 to January 2018, when Mr. Buttice was practicing at The Olde Walkerville Pharmacy Sulla Via and served as its Designated Manager. The College’s Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee had referred the matter to the Discipline Committee in November 2023, outlining several concerns about his professional conduct.
The specific allegations claimed that Mr. Buttice failed to maintain the standards of the profession and engaged in conduct that would be considered disgraceful, dishonourable, or unprofessional by his peers. Central to the case were two distinct practices related to prescription dispensing. First, it was alleged that Mr. Buttice dispensed, or allowed the dispensing of, prescription drugs for patients outside of Canada based on prescriptions that were co-signed or rewritten, without taking reasonable steps to ensure a proper physician-patient relationship existed. Verifying such a relationship is a foundational standard of practice meant to ensure patient safety and the legitimacy of a prescription.
Second, the College alleged that Mr. Buttice dispensed drugs based on prescriptions that were not valid under federal law. These prescriptions were attributed to a practitioner, identified as Dr. R.H., who allegedly did not practice in the province where they were licensed. According to the Food and Drug Regulations, a prescription is only valid if it is issued by a practitioner licensed to practice in a Canadian province. By dispensing these prescriptions, Mr. Buttice was alleged to have contravened both the federal regulations and Ontario’s Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act.
The case was scheduled to proceed to a full disciplinary hearing, but a resolution was reached before that step. Mr. Buttice’s certificate of registration with the College had already been cancelled on September 19, 2024, for non-payment of fees. Then, on January 20, 2025, he signed a binding “Undertaking, Agreement and Acknowledgment” with the College. In this document, Mr. Buttice agreed to permanently and irrevocably surrender his certificate of registration.
The terms of the undertaking are stringent and designed to ensure he never practices pharmacy in the province again. He agreed not to seek registration with the College at any point in the future. Furthermore, he promised not to own an interest in any Ontario pharmacy, either directly or indirectly, and will not direct pharmacy operations or work in a pharmacy in any capacity. He also consented to the College sharing the undertaking with other regulatory bodies across Canada.
With this agreement in hand, the College brought a motion to the Discipline Committee to adjourn the proceedings sine die, meaning indefinitely without a future date set. The College argued that this resolution was in the public interest. It achieved the highest degree of public protection by permanently removing Mr. Buttice from the profession, an outcome even more restrictive than a license revocation, which can sometimes allow for future reapplication. The College also noted that the agreement avoided a long, complex, and expensive contested hearing with an uncertain result, while saving time and resources for all parties involved.
The College further submitted that public transparency would be maintained. The College’s public register will permanently display a note indicating that Mr. Buttice resigned while facing allegations of professional misconduct, along with a summary of those unresolved allegations. This information ensures that the public and other regulators are aware of the circumstances surrounding his departure from the profession. Should Mr. Buttice ever breach the terms of his undertaking, the College retains the right to revive the discipline proceedings and prosecute the original allegations.
Mr. Buttice did not contest the motion and had previously consented to it as part of the undertaking.
The Discipline Committee panel, chaired by Megan Peck, reviewed the joint submission and agreed to grant the indefinite adjournment. The panel confirmed it retained jurisdiction over Mr. Buttice for conduct that occurred while he was a member, even though he had since resigned. In its decision, the panel stated that its primary duty is to protect the public interest. It found that the undertaking signed by Mr. Buttice fulfilled this duty by ensuring he could not practice pharmacy or have any ownership stake in a pharmacy in Ontario. The panel agreed with the College that the public interest in transparency was served by the notations on the public register and that the agreement provided a decisive resolution while holding Mr. Buttice accountable through the permanent restrictions and the threat of revived proceedings if he fails to comply.
Read more cases about proceedings in regulated professions here.
