Kenneth W. Koprowski

The corporate Appellant appealed the Registrar's refusal to issue a Commercial Vehicle Operator's Registration (CVOR) Certificate.

The refusal was based on the poor safety record and failed facility audits of the Appellant's sole director and president, who the Registrar deemed a 'related' person under the Highway Traffic Act.

The Appellant argued it was a separate legal entity and should not be penalized for its director's record.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the director controlled or managed the Appellant, making him a related person, and that his history of failed audits justified the Registrar's refusal.

The Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming issued a Notice of Proposal to suspend the appellant's liquor licence for 45 days due to two alleged incidents of overcrowding.

The appellant appealed to the Licence Appeal Tribunal.

The Tribunal heard evidence from inspectors who used manual counters to determine the premises were over capacity on both dates.

The appellant argued the inspectors' counting method was unreliable and that its own door counts were accurate.

The Tribunal accepted the uncontradicted evidence of the inspectors, finding the appellant breached s. 43 of Regulation 719 on both occasions.

The parties were directed to provide written submissions on the appropriate sanction.

Tarion Warranty Corporation brought a motion to dismiss 22 items from the appellants' second-year new home warranty appeal, arguing they were barred by res judicata and issue estoppel following a previous Tribunal decision on first-year claims.

The Tribunal reviewed each item and found that while 7 items had been conclusively decided in the previous hearing, the remaining items involved new issues or different areas of the home, such as the garage, that were not previously adjudicated.

The motion was granted in part, allowing the appellants to pursue the remaining claims.

The appellant applied for a liquor licence for a seasonal restaurant located near a provincial park in a small, historically alcohol-free community.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to review the application after receiving objections from residents concerned about safety, lighting, noise, and the proximity to the park.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the objectors' concerns were largely speculative and that the appellant's proposed self-imposed restrictions demonstrated a willingness to cooperate with the community.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar to issue the licence, subject to conditions restricting the hours of alcohol service and requiring the posting of contact information for complaints.

The appellant appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar to refuse his registration as a motor vehicle salesperson.

The refusal was based on the appellant's past conduct, which included criminal convictions for break and enter with intent to commit assault with a weapon and mischief, for which he was still on probation, as well as a prior conviction for acting as an unregistered salesperson.

The Tribunal found that the appellant had not demonstrated a sufficient period of positive, unsupervised conduct.

Considering the seriousness of the criminal offences, his tendency to minimize his involvement, and his previous violation of the Act, the Tribunal concluded 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 Tribunal directed the Registrar to carry out the proposal to refuse registration.

The appellant, a restaurant operator, applied to change conditions on its liquor licence to permit amplified music on its outdoor patio.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to refuse the changes, which the appellant appealed.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the appellant failed to prove a change in circumstances that would justify altering the conditions, which had been voluntarily accepted upon transfer of the licence.

Furthermore, based on extensive testimony from local residents and a municipal council resolution opposing the application, the Tribunal concluded that allowing the changes would not be in the public interest, as the existing conditions were necessary to maintain a peaceful balance between the commercial establishments and the community.

The appellant appealed the impoundment of a commercial trailer under the Highway Traffic Act.

The Registrar brought a preliminary motion arguing the appellant lacked standing because it was not the 'owner' of the trailer.

The Tribunal found that under section 82.1 of the Act, the owner is the person named on the vehicle portion of the certificate of registration.

Since the appellant's name only appeared on the plate portion, it did not meet the statutory definition of owner.

The motion was granted, the appellant was found to lack standing, and the impoundment was confirmed.

The appellant, a licensed establishment, brought a motion to dismiss the Registrar's Notice of Proposal to revoke its liquor licence.

The appellant argued that the Registrar's delay in issuing the notice constituted an abuse of process, and that insufficient disclosure and the death of a key investigating inspector impaired its ability to make full answer and defence.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the motion, finding no inordinate delay or significant prejudice to justify a stay of proceedings.

The Tribunal also held that the disclosure provided was adequate and that the unavailability of the inspector did not prejudice the appellant, as the related overcrowding allegation was withdrawn and direct complainants would testify regarding the noise complaints.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to revoke the registrations of SM Auto Rental Ltd. as a motor vehicle dealer and Baldev-Raj Mehta as a salesperson.

The proposal was based on allegations that Mehta assisted a friend in making false statements and non-disclosures on the friend's applications for registration in 2005 and 2012.

The Tribunal found that there was insufficient evidence of a deliberate intention to deceive on the part of the appellants, noting a language barrier and plausible explanations for the answers provided.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar not to carry out the proposal to revoke the registrations.

The appellants appealed a decision by Tarion Warranty Corporation denying several claims regarding alleged defects in their new home built by the added party.

The claims included issues with the pre-delivery inspection, front entrance steps, kitchen crown moulding, shower unit, hardwood flooring gaps, fireplace vent, and driveway grading.

The Tribunal dismissed all claims except for one relating to kitchen panels, which Tarion conceded.

The Tribunal found that the builder complied with the agreement of purchase and sale, the Ontario Building Code, and industry standards, and that the appellants failed to prove any breach of statutory warranties for the disputed items.

The appellant sought to appeal an order impounding a trailer for critical brake defects and brought a motion to extend the time to file the appeal.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the motion, finding that the appellant lacked standing to appeal because it was not the registered owner of the trailer, as required by section 50.3(1) of the Highway Traffic Act.

The Tribunal also noted that the relevant time for determining a critical defect is at the time of inspection, not after repairs are made.

The impoundment was confirmed.

The Applicant appealed a Notice of Proposed Order from the Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming refusing her registration as a Category 2 gaming assistant.

The Registrar based the refusal on the Applicant's past criminal convictions, failure to disclose 2006 convictions on her application, outstanding debts, and unfiled tax returns.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the Applicant's failure to disclose the 2006 convictions was an unintentional oversight and gave little weight to the hearsay evidence regarding police reports.

Considering her exemplary employment record at a bingo hall over the past four years and her rehabilitation from drug addiction, the Tribunal concluded her past conduct could be excused and directed the Registrar not to carry out the proposed order.

The applicant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her motor vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act, arguing that the impoundment would result in exceptional hardship.

The vehicle was impounded after the applicant's son allowed a driver with a suspended licence to drive it.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had alternative transportation available, as she owned two other vehicles.

Consequently, under O. Reg. 631/98, the Tribunal could not consider inconvenience or financial loss.

The appeal was dismissed and the impoundment was confirmed.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to revoke the registrations of the corporate applicant as a motor vehicle dealer and the individual applicant as a salesperson, alleging they breached conditions of their registrations by allowing an unregistered individual to be involved in their business.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the Registrar failed to provide clear and convincing proof of the alleged breaches.

The Tribunal concluded that the applicants' past conduct did not afford reasonable grounds for belief that they would not carry on business in accordance with the law and with honesty and integrity.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar not to carry out the proposal.

The applicant appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar to refuse his registration as a motor vehicle salesperson.

The refusal was based on the applicant's recent conviction for producing marijuana, for which he was serving an 18-month conditional sentence.

The Tribunal found that the application was premature, as the applicant had not yet completed his period of probation and had not demonstrated a sustained period of unsupervised positive conduct.

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

The applicants appealed a decision by Tarion Warranty Corporation denying their claim for defective windows in their new home.

The windows developed water between the panes shortly after possession.

The applicants reported the issue within the first year, but Tarion denied the claim for windows listed in the second-year form, arguing they were reported out of time.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding that the underlying defect was reported on time and the legislation should be given a fair, broad, and liberal interpretation.

The Tribunal awarded $4,050 for the replaced and currently defective windows, but dismissed the claim for windows that had not yet failed.

The applicants appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar to refuse their registrations as a motor vehicle dealer and salesperson under the Motor Vehicle Dealers Act, 2002.

The Registrar's proposal was based on the individual applicant's past conduct, which included convictions for issuing improper Safety Standards Certificates and failing to disclose these convictions and previous Tribunal proceedings on the registration applications.

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

The Tribunal also found that the applicants made false statements in their applications.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar to carry out the proposal to refuse the registrations.

The applicant appealed the 45-day impoundment of its commercial motor vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act, arguing that the impoundment caused exceptional hardship.

The vehicle was impounded after an employee was caught driving it with a suspended licence.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the applicant had alternative vehicles available for its business operations, which precluded a finding of exceptional hardship under O. Reg. 631/98.

The impoundment was confirmed.

The Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming proposed to revoke the applicant's liquor licence due to unremitted retail sales tax totaling $17,405.62.

The applicant appealed to the Licence Appeal Tribunal.

The parties submitted an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission on Disposition.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar to carry out the proposal to revoke the licence unless the applicant remitted specified amounts of the outstanding tax by certified cheque on three scheduled dates.

The applicant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her motor vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act, arguing that the impoundment caused exceptional hardship.

The vehicle was impounded after the applicant's son was caught driving it while his licence was suspended.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had access to alternative transportation, such as local bus service, and that there was no threat to health or safety.

The appeal was dismissed and the impoundment was confirmed.