Avril A. Farlam

The appellant appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar to refuse his registration as a motor vehicle salesperson under the Motor Vehicle Dealers Act, 2002.

Prior to the conclusion of the hearing, the parties reached a settlement.

The Tribunal issued a consent order directing the Registrar not to carry out the proposal and imposing several conditions on the appellant's registration, including compliance with disclosure requirements, passing a certification course, and a two-year restriction on applying for a dealership licence.

The appellant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend his driver's licence due to a medical condition involving seizures.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that while the appellant does suffer from seizures, the condition is controlled by medication prescribed by his treating neurologist and he has not been diagnosed with epilepsy.

The Tribunal concluded that the medical condition is not likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely and set aside the licence suspension.

The appellant condominium corporation appealed Tarion's decision regarding a first-year common element warranty claim for defective composite siding (item 4.2.2.1).

The appellant sought over $1.5 million for a complete replacement of the cladding system, arguing the defects caused widespread consequential damage.

Tarion argued the warranty only covered specific sealant repairs costing $84,830.16.

The Tribunal found that only the specific defect identified in the performance audit was covered by the first-year warranty.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of Tarion's engineer and held that the statutory warranty does not cover secondary or consequential damages.

Tarion was ordered to pay $84,830.16.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to Revoke the appellant's travel agent registration due to working capital deficiencies and trust account issues.

The appellant appealed to the Licence Appeal Tribunal.

Prior to a hearing, the parties reached an agreement and signed Minutes of Settlement, confirming the appellant had corrected its working capital deficiency.

The Tribunal issued a consent order incorporating the Minutes of Settlement, allowing the appellant to maintain its registration subject to strict financial reporting and compliance conditions.

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

The Registrar acted on medical reports from the appellant's family physician diagnosing mild cognitive impairment or dementia.

The appellant argued he was a safe driver and refused to undergo a recommended functional driving assessment.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the medical evidence established the appellant suffered from cognitive impairment likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely.

The Tribunal confirmed the licence suspension.

The appellant appealed a Notice of Cancellation and Seizure issued by the Registrar of Motor Vehicles proposing to cancel its Commercial Vehicle Operator's Registration (CVOR) due to a poor safety record.

The Tribunal found that the Registrar had sufficient reason to believe the appellant would not operate commercial motor vehicles safely, citing numerous vehicle defects, convictions, and a failure to cooperate with inspections.

The Tribunal confirmed the Registrar's decision to cancel the CVOR.

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

The Tribunal found that the appellants' past conduct, specifically the poor safety record and numerous convictions of their trucking business, afforded reasonable grounds for belief that they would not carry on business in accordance with the law and with integrity and honesty.

Furthermore, the individual appellant made false statements on the applications regarding past refusals and convictions.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar 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 Tribunal found that medical evidence from the appellant's physicians confirmed a diagnosis of moderate cognitive impairment or dementia.

The appellant also failed two functional driving assessments.

The Tribunal concluded that the appellant's medical condition is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely and confirmed the licence suspension.

The appellants brought a motion to exclude prior civil judgments and transcripts from being admitted as evidence in their appeal against a proposal to revoke their real estate registrations.

The Tribunal dismissed the motion, finding that the judgments and transcripts were relevant to the appeal and that their weight would be determined at the hearing.

On consent, the Tribunal ordered that the findings in the civil judgments did not apply to the appellant who was not a party to the civil litigation.

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of his vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act.

The vehicle was impounded after the appellant's girlfriend, who had permission to drive, allowed a third party with a suspended licence to drive the vehicle.

The appellant argued he exercised due diligence.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding the appellant made no attempts to determine the third party's licence status and presented no evidence of his girlfriend's due diligence.

The appellants purchased two condominium units and submitted delayed closing warranty claims to Tarion more than one year after the warranty start date.

Tarion denied the claims as out of time.

The appellants appealed to the Licence Appeal Tribunal, arguing that extraordinary circumstances, specifically serious health issues resulting from a car accident, prevented them from filing on time.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that under the Ontario New Home Warranties Plan Act and its regulations, Tarion has no legislative authority to extend the one-year deadline for delayed closing claims, regardless of extraordinary circumstances.

The appellant appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar to refuse his registration as a motor vehicle salesperson under the Motor Vehicle Dealers Act, 2002.

The Registrar based the refusal on the appellant's extensive criminal record, which included 20 convictions over 20 years for offences such as drug trafficking, assault, and weapons possession.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the appellant's past conduct afforded reasonable grounds for belief that he would not carry on business in accordance with the law and with integrity and honesty.

The Tribunal concluded that the application was premature given the length and nature of the criminal record, and ordered the Registrar to carry out the proposal to refuse registration.

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act, arguing that the impoundment would cause exceptional hardship because she needed the vehicle for work and to care for her father.

The Tribunal found that the appellant had alternatives to the impounded vehicle, as she was able to get rides to work and use public transit, and her father's needs were being met.

As the appellant failed to establish exceptional hardship, the appeal was dismissed and the impoundment was confirmed.

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her vehicle under section 50.2 of the Highway Traffic Act.

The vehicle was impounded after her nephew was caught driving it while suspended.

The appellant argued the vehicle was stolen at the time of impoundment.

The Tribunal found the appellant's evidence credible that she had accidentally left her keys behind and her nephew took the vehicle without her express or implied consent.

The Tribunal concluded the vehicle was stolen within the meaning of the Act and ordered the Registrar to release the motor vehicle.

The appellant appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar to refuse his registration as a real estate salesperson under the Real Estate and Business Brokers Act, 2002.

The Registrar's refusal was based on the appellant's extensive criminal record spanning 13 years, which included convictions for drug trafficking, assault, and weapons offences.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the appellant's past conduct afforded reasonable grounds for the belief that he would not carry on business in accordance with the law and with integrity and honesty.

The Tribunal concluded that conditions were not an appropriate alternative to refusal and ordered the Registrar to carry out the proposal to refuse registration.

The Deputy Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to revoke the appellant's registration as a real estate salesperson, alleging he falsely responded to questions on past applications and failed to disclose past refusals to register under the Motor Vehicle Dealers Act.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the appellant did not knowingly provide false answers and reasonably assumed the Registrar was aware of his past bankruptcy and motor vehicle dealer registration issues.

The Tribunal ordered the Registrar not to carry out the proposal, but attached a condition requiring the appellant's lawyer to review his next two renewal applications.

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act, claiming exceptional hardship.

The appellant failed to attend the teleconference hearing.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding no evidence to support exceptional hardship and noting that the appellant admitted in her Notice of Appeal to renting an alternative vehicle during the impoundment period.

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

The suspension was based on a medical condition report from an emergency room physician diagnosing the appellant with an alcohol-related seizure following a motor vehicle accident.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the medical report unreliable due to a lack of clinical evidence, testing, or history of seizures in the emergency department record.

The Tribunal preferred the appellant's evidence that he did not have a seizure and set aside the licence suspension.

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of his vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act, arguing he exercised due diligence and that the impoundment caused exceptional hardship to the vehicle's purchaser.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding no evidence was presented regarding due diligence.

The Tribunal also found no exceptional hardship because the purchaser had alternative transportation options, such as taxis, buses, and help from family and friends.

The appellant appealed a Notice of Proposal to Revoke a Licence and an immediate suspension order issued by the Registrar of Alcohol, Gaming and Racing.

The Registrar alleged the licensee obstructed and assaulted a liquor inspector, permitted a patron to remove liquor from the premises, and permitted unlawful gambling (a football pool) on the premises.

The Tribunal found that the licensee's manager aggressively confronted and grabbed an inspector, failed to prevent a patron from leaving with alcohol, and ran an illegal football pool that did not pay out 100% of proceeds.

The Tribunal concluded the licensee's conduct afforded reasonable grounds for belief that the business would not be carried on in accordance with the law and with integrity and honesty.

The appeal was dismissed and the Registrar was ordered to carry out the revocation.