Who is Raymond Ramdayal?

Raymond Ramdayal is a member at the Ontario Animal Care Review Board with 22 decisions on record from 2016 to 2026. Key areas include other tribunals, administrative law.

What tribunal does Raymond Ramdayal sit on?

Raymond Ramdayal has sat on Ontario Licence Appeal Tribunal and Ontario Animal Care Review Board and Ontario Fire Safety Commission.

What areas of law does Raymond Ramdayal decide?

Raymond Ramdayal's most common areas include Other Tribunals (22 decisions), Administrative Law (20 decisions). Raymond Ramdayal has handled 22 decisions across 2 areas.

How many decisions has Raymond Ramdayal made?

Raymond Ramdayal has 22 decisions on record from 2016 to 2026 across 3 tribunals.

Who frequently appears before Raymond Ramdayal?

Representatives who frequently appear before Raymond Ramdayal include Leila Pereira, Self-represented, Sanjay Kapur.

/Adjudicator

minicounsel

Other Tribunals

Administrative Law

Raymond Ramdayal

Member·Ontario Animal Care Review Board·Since 2016

OACRB OFSC OLAT

cases · 11 yrs · OLAT, OACRB, OFSC

Trial

Motion

Costs

Appeal

Sentencing

Member· 10Member· 7Adjudicator· 3Adjudicator· 2

OSPCA ordered to bear costs of cat's care and euthanization due to premature removal and notification failure.

The appellant appealed a Compliance Order and the removal of her cat by the OSPCA.

Unbeknownst to the appellant, the OSPCA had euthanized the cat shortly after removal.

The Board found that the OSPCA acted prematurely in removing the cat while it was under a veterinarian's treatment plan, and failed to fulfill its statutory obligation to notify the appellant of the euthanization forthwith.

Consequently, the Board ordered that the appellant is not required to pay any of the $698.17 in costs incurred by the OSPCA for the care and euthanization of the cat.

Parent v. Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 2016 CanLII 101768

Raymond Ramdayal

OLATUnanimous10 cases2016–2026

D. Gregory Flude

OLATUnanimous0 cases2010–2023

OLATOntario Licence Appeal TribunalFeb 25, 2016

Vehicle impoundment set aside due to exceptional hardship involving medical needs and lack of alternative transportation.

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act after her husband was caught driving it while his licence was suspended.

She argued exceptional hardship under s. 50.2(3)(d), citing her own medical condition requiring an MRI, her daughter's severe anxiety and dental issues, and the lack of reasonable alternative transportation.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the appellant had no reasonable alternative to the impounded vehicle and that the impoundment posed a threat to the health and safety of persons ordinarily transported by it.

The appeal was allowed and the impoundment was set aside.

9990 v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles, 2016 CanLII 9433

for the Appellant

Self-representedSelf-represented
3 appearances
Harsimran KourSelf-represented
1 appearance
Jennifer FriedmanCounsel
1 appearance
John VeniotSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kathryn EverittSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kerri Ann GilhamSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kristen LeyCounsel
1 appearance
Mark KennedySelf-represented
1 appearance
Mustafa PakzadSelf-represented
1 appearance
Parker MogckSelf-represented
1 appearance
Patricia MountainSelf-represented
1 appearance
Gregory Paul KongSelf-represented
1 appearance
Zain A. AtchaCounsel
1 appearance
Austin-Charles St-JacquesSelf-represented
1 appearance
Chelsey FlandersSelf-represented
1 appearance
Donna ChudczakSelf-represented
1 appearance
Gurinder Pal MultaniParalegal
1 appearance
Taryn CamachoSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Appellants

Justin JakubiakCounsel
1 appearance

for the Applicant

Amylynn VanSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent

Leila PereiraAgent
4 appearances
Sanjay KapurAgent
2 appearances
Sara MunozAgent
2 appearances
Wynter PatchettAgent
1 appearance
Adrien IafrateCounsel
1 appearance
Bailey WintermuteAgent
1 appearance
Colleen RobertshawCounsel
1 appearance
Danielle MeulemanCounsel
1 appearance
Jason KirshCounsel
1 appearance
Jillian SiskindCounsel
1 appearance
Joanna ChanCounsel
1 appearance
Kate AlemanyAgent
1 appearance
Ke Yi (Kelly) FanCounsel
1 appearance
Martin HeAgent
1 appearance
Melissa SummersAgent
1 appearance
Michael DraperAgent
1 appearance
Nicole DriscollAgent
1 appearance
Ryan SparksAgent
1 appearance
Savannah KortAgent
1 appearance
Sidra SaeedAgent
1 appearance

Observer

Stephen GrootenboerAgent
1 appearance

Decisions

Years active

Tribunals

0.2

cases/mo

OLAT11(50%)

OACRB10(45%)

OFSC1(5%)

Decision types

appeal

motion

/Adjudicator

Raymond Ramdayal — Member

Other Tribunals

Administrative Law

Raymond Ramdayal

Member·Ontario Animal Care Review Board·Since 2016

OACRB OFSC OLAT

cases · 11 yrs · OLAT, OACRB, OFSC

Trial

Motion

Costs

Appeal

Sentencing

Member· 10Member· 7Adjudicator· 3Adjudicator· 2

Santina Moccio

OACRBUnanimous1 case2016–2021

Raymond Ramdayal

OACRBUnanimous10 cases2016–2026

Laurie Sanford

OACRB68 cases2010–2026

OACRBOntario Animal Care Review BoardJul 8, 2016

OSPCA ordered to bear costs of cat's care and euthanization due to premature removal and notification failure.

The appellant appealed a Compliance Order and the removal of her cat by the OSPCA.

Unbeknownst to the appellant, the OSPCA had euthanized the cat shortly after removal.

Consequently, the Board ordered that the appellant is not required to pay any of the $698.17 in costs incurred by the OSPCA for the care and euthanization of the cat.

Parent v. Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 2016 CanLII 101768

Raymond Ramdayal

OLATUnanimous10 cases2016–2026

D. Gregory Flude

OLATUnanimous0 cases2010–2023

OLATOntario Licence Appeal TribunalFeb 25, 2016

Vehicle impoundment set aside due to exceptional hardship involving medical needs and lack of alternative transportation.

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act after her husband was caught driving it while his licence was suspended.

The appeal was allowed and the impoundment was set aside.

9990 v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles, 2016 CanLII 9433

Page 2 of 2 (22 cases)

for the Appellant

Self-representedSelf-represented
3 appearances
Harsimran KourSelf-represented
1 appearance
Jennifer FriedmanCounsel
1 appearance
John VeniotSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kathryn EverittSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kerri Ann GilhamSelf-represented
1 appearance
Kristen LeyCounsel
1 appearance
Mark KennedySelf-represented
1 appearance
Mustafa PakzadSelf-represented
1 appearance
Parker MogckSelf-represented
1 appearance
Patricia MountainSelf-represented
1 appearance
Gregory Paul KongSelf-represented
1 appearance
Zain A. AtchaCounsel
1 appearance
Austin-Charles St-JacquesSelf-represented
1 appearance
Chelsey FlandersSelf-represented
1 appearance
Donna ChudczakSelf-represented
1 appearance
Gurinder Pal MultaniParalegal
1 appearance
Taryn CamachoSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Appellants

Justin JakubiakCounsel
1 appearance

for the Applicant

Amylynn VanSelf-represented
1 appearance

for the Respondent

Leila PereiraAgent
4 appearances
Sanjay KapurAgent
2 appearances
Sara MunozAgent
2 appearances
Wynter PatchettAgent
1 appearance
Adrien IafrateCounsel
1 appearance
Bailey WintermuteAgent
1 appearance
Colleen RobertshawCounsel
1 appearance
Danielle MeulemanCounsel
1 appearance
Jason KirshCounsel
1 appearance
Jillian SiskindCounsel
1 appearance
Joanna ChanCounsel
1 appearance
Kate AlemanyAgent
1 appearance
Ke Yi (Kelly) FanCounsel
1 appearance
Martin HeAgent
1 appearance
Melissa SummersAgent
1 appearance
Michael DraperAgent
1 appearance
Nicole DriscollAgent
1 appearance
Ryan SparksAgent
1 appearance
Savannah KortAgent
1 appearance
Sidra SaeedAgent
1 appearance

Observer

Stephen GrootenboerAgent
1 appearance

Decisions

Years active

Tribunals

0.2

cases/mo

OLAT11(50%)

OACRB10(45%)

OFSC1(5%)

Decision types

appeal

motion

Page 2 of 2 (22 cases)