Elizabeth Sproule

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 refusal was based on the appellant's 2009 U.S. conviction for conspiracy to possess and distribute cocaine, for which he was currently on parole in Canada.

The Tribunal found that the appellant had a lengthy, unblemished history as a registrant prior to the conviction, the offence was not industry-related, and he had strong support from a prospective employer and the community.

The Tribunal concluded that the past conduct did not provide reasonable grounds to believe the appellant would not carry on business with honesty and integrity, and directed the Registrar to approve the registration subject to conditions.

The appellant appealed an Order of Monetary Penalty of $2,500 issued by the Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming for exceeding the licensed capacity of its premises, contrary to section 43 of O. Reg. 719/90.

An AGCO inspector conducted a head count and found 211 patrons in an area licensed for 176.

The appellant argued the count was inaccurate due to lighting and patron movement.

The Tribunal found the inspector's evidence credible and reliable, noting that the inspector excluded moving patrons and those in poorly lit areas.

The Tribunal confirmed the monetary penalty.

The appellant applied for a liquor licence for a restaurant.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to review the application after receiving objections from local residents.

The objectors did not oppose the licence itself but sought to restrict the hours of operation past midnight due to concerns about neighbourhood noise.

The Tribunal found the objectors failed to establish that an unrestricted licence was contrary to the public interest, noting substantial community support for the application.

The Tribunal approved the licence subject to two conditions consented to by the appellant regarding community contact information and signage.

The Appellant funeral home appealed a Notice of Proposal to revoke and immediately suspend its licence.

The suspension was based on allegations that the Appellant breached a previous interim order by denying a Tribunal-appointed monitor access to books and records, and by secretly selling and closing an affiliated funeral home location without notifying the monitor, the regulator, or senior staff.

The Tribunal found the principal's conduct lacked honesty and integrity, and that the secret closure put the public at risk.

The Tribunal concluded it was in the public interest to maintain the licence suspension pending the full hearing.

The Registrar of the Travel Industry Act, 2002 issued a Notice of Proposal to revoke the registration of the appellant travel agency.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the appellant's de facto manager was an interested person who had been managing the business without the required certification and had misled the Registrar regarding a required working capital injection.

The Tribunal also found that the appellant could not reasonably be expected to be financially responsible due to ongoing working capital shortages.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar to carry out the proposal to revoke the registration.

The Appellants appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Director of Vehicle Inspection Standards to refuse to issue a Motor Vehicle Inspection Station Licence and to refuse to register the individual Appellant as a Motor Vehicle Inspection Mechanic.

The Director's refusal was based on the Appellant's past conduct, including convictions for failing to keep proper records and failing to affix inspection stickers, as well as criminal convictions related to substance abuse.

The Tribunal found the Appellant to be forthright and honest, noting his efforts to address his addiction and his hiring of a bookkeeper to ensure regulatory compliance.

The Tribunal concluded that the Appellant's past conduct did not afford reasonable grounds for belief that he would not operate in accordance with the law and with honesty and integrity, and ordered the Director to issue the licence and registration.

The Registrar proposed to revoke the registration of the Applicant, a real estate salesperson, on the grounds that his 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 allegations involved three properties where the Applicant engaged in self-dealing, failed to disclose offers to his clients, facilitated dubious transactions, and profited from artificially inflated resale prices.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the Applicant acted contrary to his clients' interests, participated in transactions indicative of mortgage fraud, and failed to demonstrate honesty and integrity.

The Tribunal concluded that conditions on his registration would not adequately protect the public and directed the Registrar to carry out the proposal to revoke his registration.

The applicant appealed a decision by Tarion Warranty Corporation denying warranty claims for their new home.

The claims related to honeycombing in the concrete foundation and a hairline crack in a foundation repair.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the honeycombing had been repaired in a workmanlike manner and was merely a cosmetic issue.

The Tribunal also found that the hairline crack was a result of normal shrinkage and did not exceed the allowable guidelines.

The appeal was dismissed and Tarion was directed to deny the claims.

The Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming proposed to revoke the applicant's liquor licence following a fatal motor vehicle accident involving a patron who had consumed alcohol at the applicant's establishment.

The patron's post-mortem blood alcohol level was significantly above the legal limit.

The Registrar alleged that the licensee permitted drunkenness, served an intoxicated person, and obstructed an inspection by tearing a receipt.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the server only provided a reasonable amount of alcohol to the patron, who showed no signs of intoxication.

The Tribunal accepted the licensee's explanation that the receipt was accidentally torn during normal business operations and found no evidence of obstruction.

Concluding that the licensee did not know or ought to have known the patron was intoxicated, the Tribunal dismissed all allegations and directed the Registrar not to carry out the proposal to revoke the licence.

The applicant brought a motion to stay a Licence Appeal Tribunal hearing regarding the revocation of his motor vehicle dealer registration, pending the outcome of his civil lawsuit against the Registrar in the Superior Court of Justice.

The applicant argued that the civil action, which alleged bad faith and ulterior motives by the Registrar, could render the Tribunal hearing moot and that proceeding would cause irreparable harm through unrecoverable legal costs and the risk of inconsistent findings.

Applying the RJR-MacDonald test, the Tribunal found that while there was a serious issue to be tried, the applicant would not suffer irreparable harm.

Furthermore, the balance of inconvenience favoured proceeding with the hearing, as the public interest in timely regulatory oversight under consumer protection legislation outweighed the low risk of inconsistent findings.

The motion for a stay was dismissed.

The applicant appealed a Notice of Proposed Order to revoke its registration as a lottery retailer operator.

The applicant's director had previously pled guilty to selling counterfeit sports jerseys under the Copyright Act, and police had seized over $78,000 in unexplained cash from the premises.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the conviction and the inexplicable storage of large sums of cash provided reasonable grounds to believe the applicant would not act in accordance with the law, integrity, or the public interest.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar to carry out the revocation order.

The applicant appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Director of Vehicle Inspection Standards to revoke his motor vehicle inspection station licence and mechanic's registration under the Highway Traffic Act.

At the commencement of the hearing, the applicant withdrew his appeal.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal accepted the withdrawal, resulting in the immediate revocation of the licence and registration.

The applicants appealed Tarion's decision denying their new home warranty claims for water penetration around balcony doors and a master bedroom.

The builder (added party) argued the appeal should be dismissed because the applicants refused to allow the builder to conduct a water test, allegedly voiding the warranty through denial of access.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that water penetration had occurred multiple times and was not caused by improper maintenance.

The Tribunal also held that the applicants' refusal to allow the builder to conduct a water test during an adversarial proceeding was reasonable and did not constitute a denial of access that would void the warranty.

Tarion was directed to determine the cause of the leaks and ensure repairs are completed.

The applicants appealed a decision by Tarion Warranty Corporation denying their claims for various alleged defects in their new home, including issues with a glass shower, cabinet doors, ceiling unevenness, chipped bricks, and a garage door.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal reviewed the evidence and found that most of the items were either normal wear and tear, within acceptable construction tolerances, or adequately repaired by the builder.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal only with respect to the garage door frame, ordering Tarion to pay $350 for its repair.

The applicant appealed an order of the Registrar of Motor Vehicles suspending its Commercial Vehicle Operator's Registration (CVOR) certificate and seizing its plates for 21 days due to a poor safety record.

The applicant argued its safety record was inaccurate because many of its vehicles were tow trucks, which are exempt from the CVOR system.

The Tribunal found that while the applicant's record contained inaccuracies due to the inclusion of exempt vehicles, the applicant had contributed to the confusion by registering them and failing to monitor its record.

Given the applicant's lack of diligence regarding safety compliance, the Tribunal upheld the suspension but reduced it to 7 days.

The applicant applied for a liquor licence for a restaurant.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to review the application after receiving written objections from residents.

The objectors raised concerns about the proximity of a high school, underage drinking, drunk driving, and noise.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the proposed establishment was a family restaurant, not a bar, and there was no evidence to suggest the applicant would fail to comply with the law regarding serving minors or over-serving patrons.

The Tribunal concluded that granting the licence was not contrary to the public interest and approved the application.

The applicant, operating a theatre in a condominium complex, applied for a liquor licence.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to review the application due to objections from the City of Toronto, the condominium corporation, and residents.

The City and the condominium corporation consented to the licence subject to agreed conditions.

The residents objected based on safety and security cost concerns.

The Tribunal found no evidence that granting the licence would be contrary to the public interest.

The Tribunal approved the application with the agreed conditions and declined to impose additional conditions requested by the condominium corporation.

The Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming issued a Notice of Proposal to revoke the liquor licence of the applicant.

The applicant appealed the proposal to the Licence Appeal Tribunal.

The Registrar presented unchallenged evidence of numerous violations of the Liquor Licence Act and its regulations, including overcrowding, after-hours service, and operating while the licence transfer was incomplete.

The applicant's principal argued he had sold the business and was unaware of the violations.

The Tribunal found that the principal knew or ought to have known that the licence had not been transferred and that he remained responsible for compliance.

The Tribunal concluded that the applicant's past conduct afforded reasonable grounds to believe the business would not be carried on in accordance with the law and with integrity and honesty, and directed the Registrar to revoke the licence.

The applicant appealed an Order of Monetary Penalty issued by the Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming for alleged contraventions of the Liquor Licence Act and its regulations.

At the commencement of the hearing, the Registrar withdrew the order because its key witness was unable to attend.

The Tribunal noted the withdrawal and concluded the matter.

The applicant appealed a decision by Tarion Warranty Corporation disallowing a claim for a Major Structural Defect regarding the breakdown of a hot water installation that serviced radiant floor heating and a snow melt system.

The applicant argued that the hot water tank was misapplied and its failure left parts of the home without supplemental heating.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that because the home's primary heat source was two furnaces, the loss of the supplemental radiant heating and snow melt did not materially and adversely affect the normal use of the building as a home, and therefore did not meet the statutory definition of a Major Structural Defect.