D. Gregory Flude

The appellant sold his vehicle to a buyer who subsequently drove it while her licence was suspended, resulting in the vehicle's impoundment.

Because the buyer had not yet registered the transfer, the appellant remained the registered owner and was held liable for the impoundment charges.

The appellant appealed to the Licence Appeal Tribunal seeking a declaration that he was no longer the owner and therefore not liable for the charges.

The Tribunal found it lacked jurisdiction to grant declaratory relief, as its authority is strictly limited to ordering the release of a vehicle under specific statutory grounds, none of which applied.

The appellant appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming to review an application for a liquor sales licence.

At the hearing, the parties reached a settlement of all outstanding issues.

The Tribunal issued a consent order directing the Registrar to issue the liquor sales licence with attached conditions, including providing a contact number for residents and posting signs encouraging departing patrons to be considerate of the community.

Additional non-licence conditions were agreed upon regarding noise and line-up management.

The appellant licensee appealed a Notice of Proposal to suspend its liquor licence.

The Tribunal previously found the appellant breached the Liquor Licence Act by selling liquor to an intoxicated person and permitting drunkenness, which tragically resulted in the patron's death in an accident on the way home.

In determining the appropriate sanction, the Tribunal weighed factors including public protection, deterrence, and the licensee's lack of remedial measures.

The Tribunal ordered a 55-day suspension of the liquor licence.

The appellant appealed an Order of Monetary Penalty of $10,000 issued by the Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming for permitting overcrowding in its licensed premises.

Two AGCO inspectors conducted head counts and found approximately 561 patrons, well over the licensed capacity of 362.

The Tribunal found the evidence of the inspectors credible and rejected the appellant's arguments regarding the counting methodology and the security staff's testimony.

The Tribunal confirmed the monetary penalty.

The appellant appealed an Order of Monetary Penalty of $3,000 issued by the Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming for failing to clear signs of service by 2:45 a.m. and permitting the consumption of a controlled substance (marijuana) on the premises during three Special Occasion Permits.

The appellant failed to attend the hearing.

Based on the testimony of an inspector who observed patrons with alcohol after 4:00 a.m. and individuals openly smoking marijuana, the Tribunal found the allegations proven on a balance of probabilities and confirmed the monetary penalty.

The appellants appealed a decision by Tarion Warranty Corporation denying their first-year warranty claims for various alleged construction defects, including uneven drywall joints, a defective toilet seat, and improper tile installation.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellants failed to prove the workmanship fell below industry standards.

The Tribunal accepted Tarion's Construction Performance Guidelines as a valid starting point for assessing workmanship and concluded that the alleged defects were either minor, within acceptable tolerances from a normal viewing position, or matters of routine homeowner maintenance.

The Registrar proposed to deny the appellant's application for registration as a motor vehicle salesperson.

The appellant appealed but failed to appear at the hearing.

The Tribunal found that the appellant had over $23,600 in retail sales tax arrears from a previous dealership, had diverted trust funds, and had made false statements on his registration applications regarding collection actions.

The Tribunal concluded the appellant could not reasonably be expected to be financially responsible, lacked honesty and integrity, and ordered the Registrar to carry out its proposal to deny registration.

The Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming issued a Notice of Proposal to revoke the appellant's liquor licence due to repeated incidents of open drug use, drug trafficking, and intoxicated patrons on the premises.

The appellant admitted to the allegations but argued for a suspension rather than revocation.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the appellant had failed to take meaningful steps to address the issues, even after a previous suspension, and demonstrated a lack of commitment to compliance.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar to immediately revoke the appellant's liquor licence.

The Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming proposed to suspend the appellant's liquor licence for 60 days after a patron was struck and killed by a vehicle shortly after leaving the appellant's premises.

The Tribunal found that the appellant breached the Liquor Licence Act by serving the patron when he was or appeared to be intoxicated, and by permitting drunkenness on the premises.

However, the Tribunal found no evidence that the appellant engaged in practices encouraging immoderate consumption.

The matter was left open for submissions on the appropriate sanction.

The appellant appealed a decision by the Travel Industry Council of Ontario (TICO) denying his claim for compensation from the Compensation Fund following the bankruptcy of a travel agency.

The appellant failed to attend the hearing.

The Tribunal found that the appellant's claim was filed after the strict six-month limitation period set out in O. Reg. 26/05.

As the legislation provides no discretion to extend the time limit for making a claim to the Board, the appeal was dismissed and the claim was refused.

The appellant appealed the Registrar's proposal to refuse her registration as a real estate salesperson under the Real Estate and Business Brokers Act, 2002.

The refusal was based on her past conduct in British Columbia, where her mortgage broker registration was suspended for life and her real estate registration was suspended for three years due to her failure to supervise her assistant.

The Tribunal found that the appellant had demonstrated rehabilitation, taken responsibility for her past actions, and practiced without issue in Ontario for 18 months.

The Tribunal also found that a 17-year-old bankruptcy was insufficient to prove financial irresponsibility.

The Tribunal ordered the Registrar to register the appellant.

The appellant brought a motion on consent for a further stay of the Tribunal's order directing the Registrar to revoke their registration under the Motor Vehicle Dealers Act, 2002.

The Tribunal granted the stay on consent until June 15, 2015, the date of the appeal hearing at the Divisional Court.

The Tribunal also ordered on its own motion that the stay continue until the Divisional Court releases its decision.

The appellants appealed Tarion's decision to deny their second-year warranty claims for various alleged defects in their new home, including insufficient attic insulation, basement wall cracks, and sloping front porch steps.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the claims were either first-year warranty items, previously settled, unsupported by evidence of health and safety risks, or specifically excluded by statute, such as the subsidence of land affecting the front steps.

The Appellant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to refuse to issue it a Commercial Vehicle Operators Registration (CVOR).

The Registrar refused the application on the basis that the Appellant was related to two other towing companies with poor safety records and conditional safety ratings.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal reviewed the anti-avoidance provisions of the Highway Traffic Act and found that the three corporations operated as a single extended entity with common control.

The Tribunal upheld the Registrar's decision, concluding that the risk of avoiding sanctions outweighed recent safety improvements, and ordered the Registrar to carry out the refusal.

The Appellant purchased a condominium unit and the vendor delayed closing due to a province-wide elevator strike, invoking the Unavoidable Delay provisions.

The Appellant argued the vendor failed to properly notify him of the end of the delay period, entitling him to $7,500 in delayed occupancy compensation.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the vendor took all reasonable steps to inform the Appellant and properly set a new firm occupancy date based on the best available scheduling information.

The Tribunal upheld Tarion's decision to deny the warranty claim.

The appellant commercial carrier appealed an order of the Registrar of Motor Vehicles suspending its Commercial Vehicle Operators Registration (CVOR) for seven days due to a poor safety record.

The appellant had a history of failed facility audits, logbook violations, and a violation rate exceeding 100%.

Despite a show cause meeting and a proposed compliance plan, the appellant's violation rate continued to deteriorate.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found no confidence in the appellant's ability to improve without stricter sanctions.

The Tribunal modified the Registrar's order, increasing the suspension from seven to ten days and imposing a condition that the appellant's violation rate not exceed 35% for 24 months.

The appellants appealed Tarion's decision to deny warranty claims for their new home, primarily concerning HVAC issues and condensation in a third-floor bedroom.

The Tribunal found that the HVAC system met Ontario Building Code standards and that the condensation was caused by the homeowners' failure to adequately ventilate the home, which is excluded from warranty coverage.

Claims for a missing grease screen, loose shower heads, and secondary damage to a floor were also dismissed.

The Tribunal ordered Tarion to pay $350 in compensation for minor warranted items, including relocating a thermostat and humidistats.

The appellant, a convenience store operator registered as a gaming supplier, appealed a Notice of Proposed Order to revoke his registration.

Following an undercover police operation, the appellant was found to have purchased allegedly stolen goods from undercover officers and possessed over 600 cartons of untaxed cigarettes.

The Tribunal found that the appellant's past conduct, including purchasing goods he believed to be stolen and possessing untaxed cigarettes on an industrial scale, demonstrated a lack of integrity and honesty.

The Tribunal confirmed the Registrar's proposal and ordered the revocation of the appellant's registration.

The Appellant appealed an Order of Monetary Penalty of $2,000 issued by the Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming for allegedly permitting a drunk person on its premises.

The Tribunal found that while the patron was sleeping at the bar, the evidence did not establish on a balance of probabilities that he was drunk.

The symptoms observed by the inspectors were consistent with someone waking from sleep, and the patron's alcohol consumption was within Smart Serve limits.

The Tribunal set aside the monetary penalty.

The appellant brought a motion to extend the time for filing an appeal from a Notice of Proposal to Refuse to Renew a Licence under the Child and Family Services Act.

The appellant argued it was misled by the appeal procedures and missed the deadline despite intending to appeal.

Applying the four-part test from Manuel v. Registrar, the Tribunal found the appellant had a bona fide intention to appeal, the delay was short, and the prejudice to the appellant outweighed the prejudice to the Director.

However, the Tribunal concluded the appeal lacked merit because the appellant's facility had been vacant for over two years, triggering the statutory requirement under s. 203(1) to surrender the licence.

The motion to extend time was dismissed.