Brian J. Ford

The Registrar of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario sought a 45-day suspension of the Licensee's liquor licence for alleged violations of the Liquor Licence Act and breaches of its Compliance Plan.

Following a hearing, the Board found the Licensee breached conditions relating to video surveillance signage, camera maintenance, and metal detector checks, but dismissed allegations of permitting disorderly conduct.

On the issue of sanction, the Board concluded that the 12-day interim suspension already served by the Licensee was sufficient for specific and general deterrence, noting the Licensee's immediate corrective actions and the unforeseeable nature of the incident that led to the breaches.

No further suspension was ordered.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to revoke the Licensee's liquor licence for alleged violations of the Liquor Licence Act related to unpaid taxes.

The parties reached an Agreed Statement of Facts, acknowledging the Licensee owed approximately $51,359 to the Ministry of Revenue and breached the Act.

The Board accepted a Joint Submission on Disposition, ordering that the Licensee adhere to a Memorandum of Understanding regarding tax repayment and pay future Harmonized Sales Tax on time and in full as conditions of the licence.

The Registrar ordered an interim suspension of the Licensee's liquor licence following a shooting incident at the nightclub.

The Board lifted the interim suspension subject to conditions, including mandatory metal detection and video surveillance checks.

On the merits, the Board found the Licensee breached its Compliance Plan by failing to maintain operational video cameras, post surveillance signage, and ensure all persons (including band members) were checked by a metal detector.

However, the Board dismissed the allegation that the Licensee permitted violent conduct, finding that security staff responded appropriately to the initial altercation before the unexpected shooting occurred.

The applicant applied for a liquor sales licence for a deli located in a commercial unit of a condominium building.

Several residents objected, raising concerns about potential noise, property damage, and parking issues, particularly regarding a patio.

The Board noted that the application did not include a patio.

The applicant agreed to several conditions, including limiting capacity to 33 persons, restricting hours of sale, partitioning the licensed area, and prohibiting amplified music.

Finding no evidence that the applicant would not be a responsible licensee, the Board concluded it was in the public interest to approve the application subject to the agreed conditions.

The applicant applied for a liquor sales licence for a family restaurant and jazz lounge.

The City of Toronto objected, citing concerns about crime in the area and allegations that the applicant was associated with an illegal booze can at a neighbouring property.

The Board found no evidence that the applicant operated the booze can and noted he had no prior violations.

The Board approved the application subject to several conditions, including food service requirements, security cameras, and noise restrictions.

The Board previously ordered a three-day suspension of the respondent's liquor licence and requested submissions on the dates.

The respondent proposed dates that included a Wednesday, which was not a normal business day for the establishment.

The Board agreed with the Registrar that the suspension should occur on normal business days (Thursday, Friday, and Saturday) and ordered the suspension to commence on Thursday, August 18, 2011.

The applicant applied for a liquor licence for a deli.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to review the application after receiving a resident objection.

Following a hearing, the Board approved the application subject to conditions, including a capacity limit of 33 people, partitioning of the licensed area, and a prohibition on live or amplified music.

Reasons for the decision were to follow.

The Corporation of the Town of Smiths Falls applied for a liquor sales licence for the Smiths Falls Memorial Community Centre.

Objections were raised by TriCounty Addiction Services and local residents regarding the potential influence on children and safety concerns.

TriCounty Addiction Services withdrew its objection after the Town agreed to consult them on a new alcohol management policy.

The Board found no reason that issuing the licence would be contrary to the public interest and approved the application.

Following a finding that the licensee breached subsection 45(1) of Ontario Regulation 719/90, the Board ordered a 10-day suspension of its liquor licence.

The licensee proposed acceptable suspension dates.

The Board ordered the suspension to commence on August 1, 2011, and conclude on August 11, 2011.

The Corporation of the Town of Smiths Falls applied for a liquor sales licence for the Smiths Falls Memorial Community Centre.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to review the application after receiving objections from TriCounty Addiction Services and a local resident.

Following a hearing, the Board approved the application, with reasons to follow.

Following a finding that the licensee permitted an intoxicated patron on its premises, the Board held a hearing to determine the appropriate sanction.

The patron had left the establishment highly intoxicated and was subsequently stopped by police for erratic driving with a blood alcohol level three times the legal limit.

The Registrar sought a 14-day suspension, while the licensee requested a warning based on its 14-year unblemished record.

Emphasizing specific and general deterrence, the Board ordered a 10-day suspension of the liquor licence.

The Registrar of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario issued a Notice of Proposal to suspend the licensee's liquor licence for breaching a condition requiring the use of a metal detector on all entering patrons.

At the hearing, the parties presented an Agreed Statement of Facts in which the licensee admitted that security personnel failed to use a metal detector on December 18, 2010.

The Board accepted the joint submission on disposition and ordered a nine-day suspension of the liquor licence.

The applicant applied for a liquor licence for a sushi restaurant.

The City of Toronto and local residents objected due to concerns about noise, parking, and the concentration of licensed establishments in the area.

At the hearing, the applicant agreed to reduce the capacity from 328 to 140 persons and accepted 13 conditions proposed by the City and the resident objector, including restrictions on noise, food service, and future expansions.

Based on the applicant's cooperation and the agreed conditions, the objections were withdrawn and the Board approved the liquor licence.

The Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario convened a hearing to review an application for a liquor sales licence.

Preliminary submissions were heard regarding the adequacy of the notice of hearing, resulting in a request to adjourn.

The Board granted the adjournment and also granted party status to a resident objector, on consent of the parties.

The Registrar of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario issued a Notice of Proposal to suspend the liquor licence of the establishment XS, alleging violations of the Liquor Licence Act and its regulations.

The allegations included permitting underage drinking, failing to clear signs of service after hours, permitting drunkenness, and permitting the consumption of marijuana on the premises.

After a hearing, the Board found that the Licensee contravened the regulation requiring the clearing of signs of service within 45 minutes of the end of the service period.

However, the Board dismissed the allegations regarding underage drinking, permitting drunkenness, and permitting drug consumption, finding insufficient evidence that the Licensee or its staff permitted these activities.

The Board invited written submissions on penalty.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to suspend the respondent's liquor licence for allegedly permitting drunkenness on the premises, contrary to s. 45(1) of O. Reg. 719/90.

A patron testified to consuming alcohol at the establishment and was subsequently stopped by police for impaired driving shortly after leaving.

Breathalyzer tests revealed a blood alcohol concentration of .245 and .247.

The Board found that given the extreme level of intoxication, the patron would have exhibited clear signs of intoxication while in the establishment, which the staff ought to have noticed.

The Board concluded that the respondent contravened the regulation.

The Registrar of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario issued a Notice of Proposal to revoke the liquor licence of Colonel Mustard’s Pub and Deli for alleged violations of the Liquor Licence Act.

The licensee failed to attend the hearing despite being served with notices and contacted by phone on the morning of the hearing.

The Board proceeded ex parte, found that the licensee breached the Act, and ordered the immediate revocation of the liquor licence.

The Registrar of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario proposed to revoke the liquor licence of the respondent establishment on the basis that it had ceased operations and failed to surrender its licence, contrary to section 56 of O.Reg 719/90.

The licensee did not attend the hearing, which proceeded ex parte.

Based on an inspector's evidence that the premises were closed, empty, and up for sale, the Board found a breach of the regulation and ordered the immediate revocation of the liquor licence.

The Registrar of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario issued a Notice of Proposal to refuse a liquor licence application by the corporate applicant due to public objections.

After the first day of the hearing, the applicant abandoned the application.

Consequently, the Registrar withdrew the Notice of Proposal, and the Board confirmed the withdrawal.

The applicant sought to transfer a liquor licence.

In a previous decision, the Board ordered that the transfer would be approved if the applicant remitted outstanding retail sales tax to the Ministry of Revenue by a specified date, failing which the application would be dismissed.

The Registrar provided evidence that the applicant failed to remit the required tax by the deadline.

Consequently, the Board issued an order dismissing the transfer application.