Jeffery Campbell

The appellant appealed a Notice of Proposal to revoke his cannabis retail manager licence.

The Registrar issued the proposal after the appellant repeatedly obstructed AGCO inspectors during compliance inspections, yelled profanities, forced them out of his store, and sent abusive and threatening messages.

The Tribunal found the appellant's conduct egregious and concluded there were reasonable grounds to believe he would not act in accordance with the law, integrity, or the public interest.

The Tribunal confirmed the proposal and directed the revocation of the licence.

The appellant, a cannabis retail operator, appealed a Notice of Proposal to revoke its licence.

The Registrar proposed revocation based on the sole owner's conduct during multiple inspections, where he became aggressive, yelled expletives, and forced inspectors out of the store, subsequently sending abusive and threatening messages.

The Tribunal found that the owner obstructed the inspections contrary to section 37(1) of the Cannabis Licence Act, 2018.

Concluding that the appellant would not carry on business with integrity, honesty, or in the public interest, the Tribunal confirmed the proposal and directed the revocation of the licence.

The appellant sought a stay of the suspension of his Class A driver's licence pending his appeal.

Applying the RJR-MacDonald test, the Tribunal found that while there was a serious issue to be tried, the appellant failed to demonstrate irreparable harm or that the balance of convenience favoured granting a stay.

The appellant provided no evidence that his financial loss was irrevocable or could not be mitigated by his remaining Class G licence privileges.

The motion for a stay was denied.

The appellant condominium corporation appealed a decision by Tarion Warranty Corporation denying warranty coverage for 59 claimed common element deficiencies under the Ontario New Home Warranties Plan Act.

The appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence, such as expert reports or explanations, to establish on a balance of probabilities that any of the claimed items constituted a breach of warranty, a defect in construction, or a violation of the Ontario Building Code.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal confirmed Tarion's denial of all claims.

The appellant appealed an Immediate Suspension Order and a Notice of Proposal to revoke its liquor licence.

The Registrar argued that two firearm-related incidents at the licensed premises, including a shooting and the seizure of loaded firearms, demonstrated that the appellant's sole shareholder would not carry on business in accordance with the law and with integrity and honesty.

The Tribunal found that the appellant failed to implement effective security measures despite the incidents and prior warnings.

The Tribunal concluded that the past and present conduct afforded reasonable grounds for belief that the business would not be operated safely, and ordered the Registrar to carry out the proposal to revoke the licence.

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her motor vehicle under section 50.2 of the Highway Traffic Act, arguing it would cause exceptional hardship.

The vehicle was impounded after another individual was caught driving it with a suspended licence.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding the appellant failed to establish that there was no alternative to the impounded vehicle, as she was able to rent a vehicle to commute to work and run errands.

The impoundment was confirmed.

The appellant, operator of Rebel and Cabana Pool Bar, appealed the Registrar's proposals to add new conditions and refuse the removal of existing conditions on its liquor licence, primarily concerning outdoor noise that disturbed Toronto Island residents.

The Tribunal found that while noise had disturbed residents, the appellant's recent implementation of a cardioid speaker system and sound monitoring, along with the City of Toronto's new objective decibel-based noise by-law, constituted a change in circumstances.

The Tribunal rejected the Registrar's proposed condition to ban all outdoor amplified music, finding it disproportionate.

Instead, the Tribunal removed the subjective 'inaudibility' conditions and replaced them with objective decibel limits and mandatory sound monitoring, while adding conditions regarding capacity, community communication, and notification of future applications.

The appellant appealed a 90-day administrative driver's licence suspension imposed after he failed to provide a breath sample at the police station.

The appellant argued he was unable to provide a sample due to a medical reason, specifically acid reflux for which he takes medication.

The Tribunal found that the appellant failed to establish that his medical condition impaired his ability to provide a breath sample, noting his own testimony that neither his medication nor his acid reflux prevented him from blowing into the breathalyzer.

The appeal was dismissed and the licence suspension was confirmed.

The appellant appealed the Registrar's proposal to refuse to renew his horseperson licence under the Horse Racing Licence Act, 2015.

The Registrar based its proposal on the appellant's past conduct, which included recent criminal convictions for publishing an intimate image without consent, peace bonds for assault and criminal harassment, numerous workplace security incidents, and an altercation at the Steward's office.

The Tribunal found that the recency and seriousness of the criminal charges, combined with the appellant's ongoing probation and peace bonds, established reasonable grounds to believe he would not act with honesty, integrity, and in the public interest.

The Tribunal confirmed the Registrar's proposal to refuse the licence renewal.

The Appellant, operator of Rebel and Cabana Pool Bar, appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar to attach nine new conditions to its liquor licence, including a ban on outdoor amplified music, and a Notice of Proposal refusing to remove existing conditions.

The Tribunal found that while noise from the premises had disturbed nearby Toronto Island residents, a complete ban on outdoor amplified music was disproportionate given the Appellant's recent successful noise mitigation efforts and the implementation of a new decibel-based municipal noise by-law.

The Tribunal ordered the removal of several subjective and unenforceable conditions, replacing them with objective, decibel-based sound monitoring requirements aligned with the municipal by-law, while adding other conditions to address community concerns.

The appellant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend her driver's licence due to a report of severe hypoglycemia.

The appellant, who has Type 1 diabetes, experienced an isolated, intentional episode of severe hypoglycemia while hospitalized.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that this isolated incident was not the result of poorly controlled diabetes and was not likely to significantly interfere with her ability to safely drive a motor vehicle.

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

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

The parties resolved the issues in dispute and consented to the appellant's registration subject to specific terms and conditions.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal disposed of the proceeding without a hearing and ordered the registration on the agreed terms, which include strict disclosure and reporting requirements regarding criminal charges and material facts in motor vehicle trades.

The appellants sought an extension of time to appeal a decision denying their claims for compensation from the Travel Industry Compensation Fund.

The appeal was filed 316 days after the 15-day statutory deadline.

Applying the Manuel factors, the Tribunal found the appellants lacked a bona fide intention to appeal within the time limit, the delay was excessive, and the respondent would suffer prejudice.

Although the appeal might have had merit, the motion to extend time was denied.

The appellant appealed a decision by Tarion Warranty Corporation denying warranty coverage for a newly constructed home.

The construction contract with the builder was terminated prior to completion.

The Tribunal found that the contract was not substantially performed within the meaning of the Construction Act, as the cost to complete the remaining work significantly exceeded the statutory threshold.

Consequently, the home was not eligible for warranty coverage under the Ontario New Home Warranties Plan Act.

The appeal was dismissed.

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

The parties resolved the issues and consented to the appellant's registration subject to specific terms and conditions.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal issued a consent order under section 4.1 of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, disposing of the proceeding without a hearing and incorporating the agreed terms and conditions, which include a three-year restriction on holding positions other than salesperson and strict reporting requirements.

The Registrar issued an Immediate Temporary Suspension Order and a Notice of Proposal to revoke the appellant's registration under the Travel Industry Act, citing working capital deficiencies and failure to properly deposit trust funds.

The appellant appealed the Notice of Proposal.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal held a hearing to determine whether to extend the temporary suspension until the conclusion of the appeal hearing.

Finding a prima facie case of non-compliance and a serious risk to the public due to the appellant's heavy indebtedness, the Tribunal ordered the suspension extended.

The appellant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend his driver's licence for medical reasons, specifically a mental health condition and substance use disorder.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that medical evidence, including a Medical Condition Report and hospital discharge documents, established that the appellant suffers from psychosis and schizophrenia or other psychotic disorder.

Applying the CCMTA standards, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant's mental health condition is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle safely.

The appeal was dismissed and the licence suspension was confirmed.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to refuse and revoke the registrations of the appellants as a motor vehicle dealer and salesperson under the Motor Vehicle Dealers Act, 2002.

The parties resolved the issues and consented to an order confirming the registrations subject to strict terms and conditions, including reporting requirements, a letter of credit, and compliance with the Act.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal disposed of the proceeding without a hearing pursuant to section 4.1 of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, incorporating the agreed terms and conditions into the consent order.

The appellant appealed a Notice of Proposal to Revoke Registration issued by the Registrar under the Travel Industry Act, 2002, for failing to submit financial statements.

The parties resolved the dispute and consented to an order continuing the appellant's registration subject to conditions, including timely filing of financial statements and responding to Registrar requests.

The Tribunal disposed of the proceeding without a hearing under section 4.1 of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act.

The appellant appealed a Notice of Proposal to suspend his registration as a motor vehicle salesperson due to pending criminal charges and failure to disclose them.

The parties resolved the issues and consented to an order maintaining the appellant's registration subject to strict terms and conditions, including restrictions on his roles and signing authority, and requirements to report any changes in his criminal proceedings.