The Ontario Physicians and Surgeons Discipline Tribunal has ordered the revocation of Dr. Foluso Ayomitunde Olusegun Ola’s certificate of registration following a detailed investigation into his billing practices and professional conduct1. The decision, released in late 2025, concludes a lengthy process that examined allegations of systemic overbilling of the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP), boundary violations with several patients, and a failure to meet the standard of practice of the medical profession. The tribunal determined that Dr. Ola’s actions constituted a profound breach of the trust that forms the foundation of the relationship between physicians, their patients, and the public health care system.
The disciplinary proceedings against Dr. Ola were multi-faceted, focusing primarily on a period of several years during which his billing patterns were found to be highly irregular. According to the tribunal findings, Dr. Ola deliberately inflated his OHIP claims by billing for services that were either never rendered or were not clinically indicated for the patients in question. The scale of the financial misconduct was significant, with the physician claiming over two million dollars in primary mental health codes, known as K codes, between January 2016 and October 2021. In total, the physician was paid over five million dollars for various submitted fee codes during that timeframe.
The tribunal looked closely at the specific nature of the billing errors and found that they were not the result of simple administrative mistakes or a misunderstanding of the complex OHIP Schedule of Benefits. Instead, the panel concluded that Dr. Ola had purposefully manipulated the system for his own financial gain. One of the more flagrant examples cited in the decision was the physician’s practice of billing for patient assessments while simultaneously billing for primary mental health care for the same visit. In these instances, he ran the clock concurrently for both services, despite the fact that the regulations require specific minimum time commitments for each. The tribunal found that he could not have possibly provided the services in the manner described in his submissions to the provincial insurance plan.
Furthermore, the investigation revealed that Dr. Ola billed for specific procedures that were never actually performed. These included ear syringing and nerve conduction studies. An expert review of his patient charts, conducted by Dr. Ferguson, suggested that the medical documentation often failed to support the necessity of the tests and procedures that were billed. The tribunal noted that Dr. Ola subjected his patients to medically unnecessary investigations, which not only drained public resources but also potentially subjected individuals to interventions they did not require.
Beyond the financial aspects of the case, the tribunal addressed several serious boundary violations involving three of Dr. Ola’s patients. These violations included the physician hugging one patient, providing another with a cash gift, and making inappropriate comments about the physical appearance of all three individuals. While the defense argued that these actions did not reach the same level of severity as the billing fraud, the tribunal found that they were representative of a broader failure to maintain professional boundaries. Such actions, the panel noted, undermine the professional distance required to ensure that patient care remains objective and safe.
The tribunal also considered Dr. Ola’s failure to meet the standard of practice regarding clinical care and follow up. Evidence presented at the hearing indicated that the physician performed various point of care tests that were not indicated based on the documentation in the patient charts. Perhaps more concerningly, the tribunal found that there were several instances where Dr. Ola failed to follow up on abnormal results for his patients. This lack of oversight regarding critical health data was cited as a significant risk to patient safety and a departure from the expectations placed upon a competent physician in Ontario.
During the penalty hearing, which took place via videoconference in November 2025, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario argued that the only appropriate response to such systemic and deliberate misconduct was the revocation of Dr. Ola’s license. The College maintained that Dr. Ola’s actions represented a sustained attack on the integrity of the publicly funded healthcare system. They argued that the public must have confidence that the College can effectively govern the profession and that deliberate fraud will be met with the most severe consequences available under the law.
In response, Dr. Ola’s legal counsel proposed a less severe penalty, suggesting a twelve month suspension of his certificate of registration followed by a period of supervised practice. The defense pointed to several factors they believed should mitigate the punishment. They noted that Dr. Ola did not have a prior formal discipline history and that he had admitted to many of the underlying facts of the case, which allowed the hearing to proceed more efficiently. The defense also raised Dr. Ola’s personal circumstances, including a lack of mentorship as an internationally trained physician and the personal loss of family members and friends in 2022.
However, the tribunal was not persuaded that these factors justified a return to practice. The panel pointed out that the majority of the misconduct occurred between 2016 and 2021, well before the personal tragedies cited by the defense. Regarding the lack of mentorship, the tribunal stated that while the challenges faced by racialized and internationally trained physicians are real and should be considered in certain contexts, they did not apply here. The tribunal found that Dr. Ola’s actions were not the result of a lack of knowledge or guidance but were instead a deliberate choice to engage in dishonest billing for personal profit.
The tribunal also addressed a previous decision from 2016 by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee (ICRC) regarding Dr. Ola. While the ICRC decision did not count as a formal discipline history, it served as a prior caution to the physician regarding his professionalism and record keeping. That case involved a dispute over the fees Dr. Ola charged an insurance company for medical records and his refusal to release the records until he was paid. The ICRC had cautioned him at that time about his billing practices and his overreliance on templates in his documentation. The tribunal found this relevant because it demonstrated that Dr. Ola had been warned about the importance of proper documentation and billing integrity years before the current charges were laid.
In reaching its decision to revoke Dr. Ola’s license, the tribunal looked to legal precedents involving medical fraud in Ontario. They specifically referenced the case of College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario v. Fagbemigun, where a physician similarly lost his license after being found to have intentionally billed for services not rendered. The tribunal noted that while older cases might have resulted in suspensions for similar behavior, the legal landscape has shifted toward more severe penalties for deliberate dishonesty. The panel emphasized that when a physician is found to have systematically defrauded the public purse, the primary goals of the penalty must be protection of the public and the maintenance of public confidence in the medical profession.
The final order issued by the tribunal includes several components designed to reflect the gravity of the misconduct. In addition to the immediate revocation of his certificate of registration, Dr. Ola has been ordered to appear before the panel for a formal reprimand. He is also required to pay a fine of $35,000 to the Minister of Finance. This figure represents the maximum fine the tribunal has the authority to impose. Although the tribunal noted it does not have the power to order the direct repayment of the millions of dollars overbilled to OHIP, it characterized the fine as a way to return at least some funds to the taxpayers of Ontario.
Finally, the tribunal ordered Dr. Ola to pay the College costs in the amount of $51,850. This amount was calculated based on the tariff for a five day hearing. The revocation of the certificate of registration became effective on December 19, 2025. The decision serves as a clear signal from the regulator that the integrity of the billing system is a central component of professional medical practice and that efforts to exploit the public healthcare system for personal gain will lead to the permanent loss of the privilege to practice medicine in the province of Ontario.
Read more cases about proceedings in regulated professions here.
