Simon Dann

The applicant appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming to review its liquor licence application due to an objection from the City of Toronto.

The parties reached an agreement and requested a consent order without a hearing.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal ordered the proceedings concluded and directed the issuance of the liquor licence subject to the agreed conditions regarding business operations, patron safety, and neighbourhood impact.

The applicant applied for a licence for an additional outdoor area.

The Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming issued a Notice of Proposal to review the application after receiving a written objection.

At the hearing, the objector failed to appear and the Registrar took no position.

The Tribunal approved the application and directed the Registrar to issue the licence, subject to compliance with all statutory conditions and municipal regulations.

The applicant appealed an order of the Registrar of Motor Vehicles cancelling its Commercial Vehicle Operators Registration (CVOR) certificate and seizing its plates due to a poor safety record.

The applicant had previously been subject to a fleet limitation and performance conditions, which it failed to meet.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found no evidence that the applicant's proposed action plan and safety training were implemented or produced positive results.

Concluding that the applicant would not operate safely, the Tribunal ordered the Registrar to carry out the cancellation and seizure order.

The applicant, owner of the Scruffy Duck Restaurant, appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming refusing to remove conditions from its liquor licence.

The conditions restricted indoor and patio hours and prohibited live or amplified music on the patio.

The applicant argued a change in circumstances since purchasing the establishment in 2008 and that removing conditions was not contrary to the public interest.

Objectors raised concerns about noise and patron behaviour.

The Tribunal found a change in circumstances, noting the new owners had no compliance issues and had implemented sound control measures.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, extending indoor and patio hours, but retained the prohibitions on live and amplified music on the patio due to proximity to residential neighbours.

The applicant sought to extend its existing indoor liquor licence to an outdoor sidewalk patio.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to review the application after receiving an objection.

The objector raised concerns about sidewalk accessibility for the elderly and handicapped, but did not object to the sale of alcohol itself.

The municipality supported the application and confirmed the patio met all requirements.

The Tribunal found the objector failed to prove that issuing the licence was not in the public interest, and directed the Registrar to issue the licence.

The applicant appealed a Notice of Proposal to review its application for a liquor licence to serve alcohol at a municipal concession stand in a public park.

Several community members objected, arguing that alcohol consumption in a family park would expose children to inappropriate behaviour and increase crime.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the objectors failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that issuing the licence was against the public interest.

The Tribunal noted the municipality's support, the lack of police objection, and the applicant's proposed security measures.

The application was approved subject to conditions, including a two-drink maximum and the use of red plastic cups.

The applicants appealed two decisions by Tarion Warranty Corporation denying their claims regarding their new home.

The first claim alleged a major structural defect due to dampness and efflorescence on the garage foundation wall.

The second claim sought Second-Year warranty coverage for the same issue.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed both appeals, finding no evidence of a load-bearing failure or that the home was uninhabitable, which is required for a major structural defect.

Furthermore, the tribunal found the applicants failed to request a conciliation inspection within the prescribed eligibility period for the Second-Year warranty.

The Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming issued a Notice of Proposal to suspend the applicant's liquor licence, alleging the licensee permitted drunkenness on the premises.

The allegations stemmed from an incident where inspectors observed an intoxicated female patron who was later arrested for impaired driving.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found insufficient evidence that the patron exhibited behaviour that should have alerted the licensee's staff to her intoxication prior to the inspectors' intervention.

The Tribunal concluded the Registrar failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the licensee knew or ought to have known the patron was drunk, and directed the Registrar not to carry out the proposal.

The applicant appealed a Notice of Proposal to revoke its liquor sales licence.

The Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming issued the proposal because the applicant failed to surrender its licence immediately after ceasing to operate the business.

The applicant argued that the business was closed due to health issues and that a sale was pending.

The Tribunal found that the establishment had been closed for more than two years without the licence being surrendered, constituting a breach of section 56 of Ontario Regulation 719/90.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar to carry out the proposal and revoke the licence.

The applicant appealed a proposal by the Registrar to refuse his application for registration as a funeral director.

The refusal was based on the applicant's past conduct towards co-workers, substance abuse issues, and criminal convictions for which he was still on probation.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence of rehabilitation or that he had stopped using drugs.

The Tribunal concluded there were reasonable grounds to believe the applicant would not conduct himself with honesty, integrity, and in accordance with the law, and directed the Registrar to refuse the application.

The Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming issued a Notice of Proposal to suspend the applicant's liquor licence for 10 days for permitting minors to consume liquor and failing to inspect identification.

The Tribunal previously found the applicant breached subsections 30(4) and 41(1) of O. Reg. 719/90.

In this decision on sanction, the Tribunal considered the seriousness of the contraventions, the lack of prior infractions, and the applicant's remedial actions.

The Tribunal ordered a six-day suspension of the liquor licence to achieve specific and general deterrence.

The applicant appealed an Order of Monetary Penalty issued by the Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming for allegedly permitting drunkenness on its licensed premises, contrary to subsection 45(1) of O. Reg. 719/90.

While the Tribunal found that a patron was intoxicated on the premises, it concluded there was insufficient evidence that the licensee permitted the drunkenness to occur, as the licensee was in the process of dealing with the situation when inspectors arrived.

The appeal was allowed and the monetary penalty was set aside.

The applicants appealed a decision by Tarion Warranty Corporation denying their claims for a major structural defect warranty regarding their new home.

The applicants raised concerns about foundation cracks, soil settlement, the septic system, and other issues.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the applicants failed to provide evidence that the defects rendered the home uninhabitable or unsafe, and thus did not meet the statutory definition of a major structural defect.

The applicant sought a liquor licence for a new restaurant and patio, requesting operating hours until 2:00 a.m.

Local residents objected, citing concerns about noise, increased traffic, and disruption to a nearby public swimming area, and requested that service end at 10:00 p.m. on the patio and 11:00 p.m. inside.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the objectors did not fully meet the onus to prove that the requested hours were against the public interest.

The Tribunal approved the licence but imposed compromise conditions, including ceasing alcohol service on the patio at midnight (Monday-Saturday) and inside at 1:00 a.m., along with noise and lighting restrictions.

The Applicant, a casino employee, appealed an Order of Immediate Suspension issued by the Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming after being criminally charged with assault and breach of recognizance relating to a domestic dispute with a co-worker.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the workplace harassment complaint against the Applicant was groundless and that he did not pose a threat to public safety or the integrity of the gaming industry.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar to set aside the suspension and attached conditions to the Applicant's registration pending the outcome of the criminal charges.

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

At the hearing, the applicant and the added party, the City of Toronto, presented a consent agreement containing proposed conditions for the licence.

The resident objectors did not present evidence, and the Registrar took no position.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal directed the Registrar to issue the licence subject to the agreed conditions, which included requirements for food service, seating, noise control, and video surveillance.

The applicant licensee appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming refusing to remove conditions on its liquor licence.

The conditions related to patio hours and noise mitigation.

The Tribunal found that an inconsistency in the wording of the original conditions warranted clarification and constituted a change in circumstances.

Balancing the licensee's competitive interests with the neighbouring residents' noise concerns, the Tribunal approved the application to remove the old conditions and ordered new, clarified conditions extending patio hours slightly but imposing stricter noise controls.