[1] It is issued upon discovery of an unlawful event, and is due and payable subject only to any rights of review that may be available under the AMP's implementing scheme.
They are held not to arise from criminal proceedings, as "the purpose ... is to promote honesty and deter gross negligence"[7] and "it is rational that the state would only wish to impose a penalty on those who engage in misconduct knowingly, recklessly, or with a particular intention.
[10] In Guindon, the Federal Court of Appeal provided more guidance in its judgment as to when an administrative penalty would be considered disproportionate.
[11] The Ontario Court of Appeal has given a reasoned evaluation for a monetary penalty that arose from a securities proceeding,[12] and the Administrative Tribunal of Quebec has recognized that a person can bring forward the "reasonable, prudent and diligent person" defence that exists in civil law against the imposition of AMPs.
[16] In response, some have suggested that, with proper planning, an online system would be more cost-efficient and promote easier access to justice for people in rural areas and for those with language barriers.