Avril A. Farlam

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her vehicle for driving while suspended, arguing that the impoundment caused exceptional hardship regarding her employment and childcare responsibilities.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant failed to demonstrate that there were no alternatives to the impounded vehicle, as public transit, vehicle rentals, and ride-sharing services were available options.

The appellant appealed the suspension of his driver's licence by the Registrar of Motor Vehicles under section 47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act.

The suspension was based on a medical report indicating severe alcohol and cannabis use disorder.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that while the appellant has an alcohol use disorder, the evidence did not establish on a balance of probabilities that the condition was likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely.

The appellant had demonstrated insight, reduced his substance use, and sought treatment for his mental health issues.

The Tribunal set aside the Registrar's decision to suspend the licence.

The appellant appealed an Order of Monetary Penalty imposing two $1,500 penalties for alleged violations of the Liquor Licence Act regulations.

The Registrar alleged that the appellant served liquor outside prescribed hours and failed to clear signs of service within 45 minutes of the end of the service period.

The Tribunal found the inspector's evidence credible and concluded that the appellant had served a drink after 2:00 a.m.

The appellant admitted to failing to clear signs of service.

The Tribunal found both violations proven and ordered the parties to proceed with submissions on the appellant's constitutional question regarding settlement negotiations.

The appellant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend his driver's licence due to alcohol dependence and an alcohol-related seizure.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the medical evidence, including reports from the appellant's family physician and an internal medicine specialist, established that the appellant suffered from alcohol dependence.

Applying the CCMTA Medical Standards for Drivers, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant's condition was likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely, as there was no medical evidence of sustained abstinence or successful completion of a rehabilitation program.

The appeal was dismissed and the licence suspension was confirmed.

The appellant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend his driver's licence under s. 47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act due to heart disease with pre-syncope/syncope/arrhythmia.

The appellant experienced a cardiac arrest and defibrillator shock while driving, causing his wife to take control of the vehicle.

He experienced a second shock a few months later.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the appellant's medical condition was likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely, noting that six months had not passed since his last ICD event as required by the CCMTA Medical Standards for Drivers.

The Tribunal confirmed the Registrar's decision to suspend the licence.

The appellant's vehicle was impounded after his brother was caught driving it while his licence was suspended.

The appellant filed an appeal and a motion to extend the time to appeal 43 days after the impoundment, well past the 15-day statutory deadline.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the motion for an extension of time, finding no bona fide intention to appeal within the time limit, significant delay, and weak merits regarding the appellant's claims of due diligence and exceptional hardship.

The appellant appealed the Minister of Transportation's decision to downgrade his commercial Class AZ driver's licence to a Class G licence due to a cardiovascular condition.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the appellant's multiple cardiac abnormalities, including heart failure and atrial fibrillation, posed a significant risk of sudden incapacitation.

The Tribunal confirmed the Minister's decision, concluding that the appellant's cardiovascular condition was likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a commercial motor vehicle safely.

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of his vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act, arguing it would cause exceptional hardship for his daughter's employment and financial strain.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant and his daughter had alternative modes of transportation available, specifically the use of his wife's vehicle and rides from friends.

Because alternatives existed, the Tribunal was precluded by regulation from considering financial loss or inconvenience.

The appellant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend her driver's licence due to cognitive impairment.

The Registrar relied on medical reports from the appellant's geriatrician and family physician, as well as a failed functional driving assessment.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the appellant suffers from cognitive impairment that significantly interferes with her ability to drive safely.

The appeal was dismissed and the licence suspension was confirmed.

The appellant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend his driver's licence under section 47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act due to alcohol dependence.

The suspension was triggered by a medical report from a physician who treated the appellant after a fall.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the appellant's testimony unreliable and preferred the medical evidence confirming a diagnosis of alcohol dependence.

Applying the CCMTA Medical Standards for Drivers, the Tribunal concluded the appellant's condition was likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely, as he had not abstained from alcohol for 12 months or completed a rehabilitation program.

The licence suspension was confirmed.

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act, arguing it caused exceptional hardship due to financial strain.

The vehicle was impounded after her son drove it while his licence was suspended.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant owned and drove another vehicle during the impoundment period.

Because she had an alternative to the impounded vehicle, she failed to meet the threshold requirement for exceptional hardship under O. Reg. 631/98, and the Tribunal could not consider her financial losses.

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her vehicle for driving while suspended, arguing it would cause exceptional hardship as she needed it for work and medical appointments.

The Tribunal found that the appellant had alternative transportation options, including borrowing her father's vehicle and using public transit.

Because alternatives were available, the Tribunal could not consider financial loss and concluded that exceptional hardship was not established.

The impoundment was confirmed.

The appellant appealed the 90-day suspension of her driver's licence for refusing to provide a breath sample, arguing she was medically unable to do so.

At the commencement of the hearing, the Tribunal noted that the Criminal Code provisions authorizing the breath demand had been repealed prior to the suspension date, and the Highway Traffic Act had not been amended to reflect this.

The Tribunal adjourned the hearing to allow the self-represented appellant to obtain legal advice and for both parties to prepare oral submissions on the legal effect of this legislative change.

The appellant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend his driver's licence due to cognitive impairment.

The appellant's family physician diagnosed him with mild cognitive impairment, and he subsequently failed three functional driving assessments.

Despite the appellant's testimony and conflicting medical reports from other doctors obtained after the suspension, the Tribunal found the failed functional assessments and the initial diagnosis compelling.

The Tribunal concluded that the appellant suffers from a cognitive impairment likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely and confirmed the licence suspension.

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her vehicle for driving while suspended, arguing it caused exceptional hardship due to medical appointments and financial strain.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the appellant had alternatives to the impounded vehicle, such as rides from friends and taxis, which she utilized during the impoundment period.

Because alternatives were available, the Tribunal could not consider financial loss as a factor for exceptional hardship.

The appeal was dismissed and the impoundment confirmed.

The appellant, a paramedic student, suffered a single unprovoked seizure during a work placement.

The Minister of Transportation downgraded her Class F driver's licence to a Class G licence based on medical reports.

The appellant appealed the decision to the Licence Appeal Tribunal.

The Tribunal found that while the appellant did suffer a seizure, it was an isolated event caused by extraordinary stress and exhaustion, and she was not diagnosed with epilepsy.

Because her condition was successfully controlled by medication prescribed by her neurologist, the Tribunal concluded it was not likely to significantly interfere with her ability to drive a Class F motor vehicle safely.

The Minister's decision to downgrade the licence was set aside.

The appellant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend her driver's licence under section 47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act due to a medical report diagnosing her with major depressive disorder and substance use disorder.

The Registrar conceded the substance use disorder was no longer a basis for suspension.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that while the appellant suffers from major depressive disorder, the condition is stable, medically supervised, and not likely to significantly interfere with her ability to drive safely.

The Tribunal set aside the Registrar's decision to suspend the licence.

The appellants appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar to refuse their registration as a motor vehicle dealer and salesperson.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the appellants had traded in motor vehicles, specifically by leasing vehicles to consumers, while unregistered.

The Tribunal concluded that this past conduct afforded reasonable grounds for belief that the appellants would not carry on business in accordance with the law and with integrity and honesty.

The appeal was dismissed and the Registrar was directed to carry out the proposal to refuse registration.

The appellant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend his driver's licence due to cognitive impairment.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal reviewed medical reports indicating the appellant suffered from dementia and had failed a functional driving assessment.

The Tribunal found that the appellant's cognitive impairment was likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely and confirmed the licence suspension.

The appellant sought an extension of time to appeal the 45-day impoundment of her vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act.

The vehicle was impounded after the driver, who was not the appellant, was caught driving while suspended.

The appellant filed her appeal 20 days after the 15-day statutory deadline expired, arguing she delayed because the driver initially promised to pay the impoundment fees.

The Tribunal applied the Manuel factors and dismissed the motion, finding no bona fide intention to appeal within the time limit, significant delay, prejudice to the respondent, and weak merits on the substantive due diligence and exceptional hardship grounds.