Registrar, Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario v. 1749696 Ontario Inc., 2010 CanLII 7635

ALCOHOL AND GAMING COMMISSION OF ONTARIO

IN THE MATTER OF The: Liquor Licence Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. L.19, as amended

B E T W E E N:

Registrar, Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario

Registrar

-and-

1749696 Ontario Inc. operating as Main’s Mansion Restaurant & Bar

Licensee

DECISION ON FINDINGS

Panel: Allan Higdon, Board Member Eleanor Meslin, Board Member

Decision Date: January 6, 2010

Hearing Location: Toronto, Ontario

Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario 90 Sheppard Avenue East, Suite 300 Toronto, Ontario M2N 0A4 Phone: (416) 326-0366 Fax: (416) 326-5566 Toll Free In Ontario: 1-800-522-2876 Website: www.agco.on.ca

Appearances

Registrar, Alcohol and Gaming Commission ) Richard Kulis, Representative 1749696 Ontario Inc., Licensee ) Jerry Levitan, Representative

Allegations

1A hearing into Notice of Proposal (“NOP”) number 17246 dated May 13, 2009 to suspend liquor licence number 800399 (the “Licence”), issued to 1749696 Ontario Inc.(the “Licensee”), operating as MAIN’S MANSION RESTAURANT & BAR, 144 Main Street, Unit # 18, Markham, Ontario, L3P 5T3, (the “establishment” or the “premises”), on the basis of alleged violations of 30(4) of the Liquor Licence Act (the “LLA”) and section 45.1 and subsections 34(1) and 45(1) of Ontario Regulation 719/90 (the “O.Reg.”), prescribed under the LLA, was held on November 2, 2009, in the City of Toronto.

Decision

2The Board FINDS that the Licensee breached subsections 45.1 and 45(1) of the O.Reg and subsection 30(4) of the LLA. The Board DECLINES to find that the Licensee committed a breach of subsection 34(1) of the O.Reg. Reasons follow.

Preliminary Matters

3Registrar's Counsel requested the exclusion of witnesses. It was agreed to by Licensee's Counsel and so ordered.

Registrar’s Evidence

4Donald Anderson has been an inspector with the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (“AGCO”) since January 2005.

5The witness stated he was at the premises in question on the night of October 11, 2008 at 1:33 a.m. accompanied by Inspector Noseworthy.

6The witness approached the front entrance and saw several patrons leave with beverages in their hands. One was a male with a bottle of beer and another was a female with a mixed drink.

7The Inspector told the patrons to return and take their drinks inside.

8He observed a fight outside on the north-east corner of the patio between two males.

9Patrons came out of the premises – some to try to break up the fight, others joined in the fight.

10Inspector Anderson considered the situation so volatile that he called 9-1-1 within five minutes of his arrival on the scene.

11The witness stated a number of people poured out of the premises. He estimated about 40 patrons came out and fights started among them.

12The Inspector did not observe any weapons but he saw a chair flying off the patio and hit a car.

13The police arrived in several cruisers and a helicopter.

14The witness observed numerous small fights proceeding down Main Street from the premises.

15The Inspector spoke to the head of security, Cliff Howatt, who told him four security staff were on duty. Mr. Howatt also stated there were approximately 450 people in the establishment.

16The witness noted that October 11, 2008 was the Friday night of a busy long weekend.

17The witness spoke to the manager, Saeid Targhi, and advised him he would be sending a report of the incident to his supervisor.

18The witness suggested to the manager that he should hire additional security staff on a long weekend.

19The witness left the scene with his partner at 2:47 a.m.

20The witness stated there is a Hungarian restaurant in the same plaza but he did not think it was open in the early morning. Other restaurants are more than a kilometre away.

21The witness was unable to recall if security personnel wore identifiable clothing.

22Inspector Anderson related that he had his conversation with the manager and head of security on the sidewalk out front of the premises.

23The witness noted he continued his inspection duties in other establishments on Main Street. When he finally finished his work at 3:01 a.m. he saw that police were still dealing with the crowd in front of Main’s Mansion.

24On cross-examination, the witness stated he did not see any patrons from other premises become involved in the melee in front of Main’s Mansion.

25Inspector Anderson stated the first man who came out of the premises was fighting. He saw others come out of the premises but he cannot recall who else came out and joined in the fighting.

26Two people left the premises carrying alcohol – one carried a beer, the other had a mixed drink in a plastic cup.

27The witness did not look inside the two containers or smell them. He has no record in his notes, about what kind of beer was in the bottle.

28Inspector Anderson acknowledged there is no direct evidence indicating either of the two patrons drinking the alcohol.

29The witness was unable to recall if other patrons came out of the premises with alcohol.

30The witness stated he told the two patrons who came out of the premises to go back inside. He did not see any drunken behaviour.

31Inspector Anderson recounted that he entered the premises through the back parking lot, not the front entrance. As he entered, he saw a couple arguing and noted a fight outside in the north east corner of the patio.

32The witness could not recall if security personnel from the premises were attempting to deal with the crowd once it got unruly. He was too busy phoning 9-1-1 and answering questions from the dispatcher.

33The witness acknowledged he was present on scene for about one hour and he did not see anyone drunk.

34The witness stated he did not enter the premises of Main’s Mansion that night.

35D.B. is a minor, born September 5, 1991, now aged 18 years. She stated she has been to Main’s Mansion twice and was present on the night of October 11, 2008. She had just turned 17.

36It was the Thanksgiving long weekend. She attended the premises with an older crowd.

37The witness stated she was carded at the door. She presented the identification (“I.D.”) of a friend who is 19 years of age.

38The security person took her I.D. card, scanned it, looked at her several times and let her in. She looks fairly similar to the photo.

39The witness arrived with friends and they all had their I.D. checked.

40The witness ordered a few drinks of alcohol from the bartender. There was no request for I.D. from the bartender. The bar was busy.

41The witness stated a fight broke out outside, and a person was thrown on to somebody’s car. A chair was thrown from the patio of the bar and it hit the back of her head.

42The witness received a bump on the head. She was hurt and crying when she was stopped by a police officer. The chair that hit her was plastic.

43The witness did not see any fights other than the episode of a person being thrown on to a car. She did not know if that person had come from Main’s Mansion.

44Rodney Lord has been a police officer with York Regional Police since April 2002. He was present at Main’s Mansion on the night of October 11, 2008.

45The witness heard talk of a disturbance at the premises on the police radio and arrived on-site with a partner at 1:45 a.m.

46The witness saw a large fight in progress involving 30 to 40 people. In addition, there were a lot more people out on the street.

47Constable (“Cst.”) Lord and his partner attempted to stop the fights and waded into the crowd, breaking up altercations.

48The witness spoke to one man who was obviously intoxicated. Normally, the witness would have arrested someone in that condition for public drunkenness, but there were too many people fighting and too much happening to do so.

49The witness told the man he was drunk and should go home. The man started pestering a woman so the officer took him into custody for causing a disturbance.

50In response to questions from Registrar's Counsel, the witness stated the police radio call he received directed him to a disturbance at Main’s Mansion.

51The crowd was directly in front of the premises and south of it. No other licensed premise was nearby – the crowd definitely was from Main’s Mansion.

52The witness stated the crowd was very confrontational – pushing and shoving. In total, there were about 150 people present.

53The witness said the man he took into custody was handcuffed, put in the cruiser, and later placed in a jail cell.

54Two other people were arrested from the crowd in front of Main’s Mansion.

55At 2:35 a.m. the witness left the police station after depositing his prisoner. He was asked to return to Main’s Mansion and arrived back on scene at 2:38 a.m.

56Once on the scene, the witness was told by another officer that more fights had taken place in his absence.

57The witness was called to break up a large crowd of yelling, screaming, intoxicated people at a nearby Pizza Pizza. He left that scene at 3:00 a.m.

58On cross-examination, the witness was not able to identify any of the pizza crowd as Main’s Mansion patrons. He stated they could have come from other pubs.

59The witness stated the only calls he received that night from Main Street were related to the incident at Main’s Mansion.

60Cst. Lord said he never asked the man he took into custody how many drinks he had consumed or where he had been drinking. He does not know the disposition of the charges laid against the man.

61The witness stated he did not know if any of the drunken members of the crowd were patrons of Main’s Mansion. He did not ask people where they had been drinking.

62The officer said he did not lay any charges against Main’s Mansion.

63On reply, the witness stated he was called back to Main’s Mansion after his first encounter as the situation was not under control.

64The witness said his understanding was that the incident started at Main’s Mansion and developed into a crowd of intoxicated people who were yelling, shouting and fighting.

65Greg Hurst has been a constable in the York Regional Police since April 2005. He was present at Main’s Mansion on the night of October 11, 2008.

66Cst. Hurst was on general patrol when he received a call at 1:40 a.m. regarding a disturbance. He was told 20 to 30 people were fighting in the street.

67Once on the scene, the witness saw a large group of males and females yelling and screaming. The males were very aggressive. The witness broke up a fight, arrested the instigator, and put him in the cruiser.

68The large crowd was within 25 metres of Main’s Mansion. There was no other nearby restaurant or bar open at that hour.

69The scene was mayhem when the officer arrived. The crowd was coming out of Main’s Mansion.

70The officer noticed a male wearing a white T-shirt and blue jeans who was particularly aggressive. Cst. Hurst approached, but the man fled about 100 metres before he tackled him. The man was arrested and searched. This took place at 1:50 a.m.

71The crowd began to disperse and other officers arrived on the scene. The witness left the area between 2:15 and 2:30 a.m. and took the suspect to the police station.

72On cross-examination, the witness stated he did not know if the people who were fighting were from Main’s Mansion. He did not ask them where they had been drinking but they were all around the front of the premises.

73Cst. Hurst did not know the disposition of the charges against the man he arrested.

74The witness said he could not recall the involvement of any bar security personnel in the fracas.

75On reply, the witness stated he saw a bar security man across the street from the premises but he did not know what the man was doing.

76Cst. Hurst did not ask any of the crowd if they had been drinking at Main’s Mansion. His focus was on calming the crowd and breaking up fights.

77Mark Kitchen has been a member of the York Regional Police for four and one-half years. He was present at the premises on the night of October 11, 2008.

78Cst. Kitchen stated he received a radio call at 1:40 am regarding a large street fight. He arrived on scene at 1:43 a.m. and saw people fighting on the sidewalk and in the street.

79The witness attempted to separate the fights.

80The officer was told of a possible assault on a woman and a witness pointed to a suspect. The witness ordered the suspect to stand still but he turned and ran.

81The witness pursued the man on foot and arrested him for assault.

82The witness returned to the vicinity of Main’s Mansion to assist with calming the crowd. There were many intoxicated people around the premises and he stayed to clear the crowd.

83Cst. Kitchen observed a male in front of Main’s Mansion who was stumbling and incoherent. He advised him to move on and go home.

84The man started yelling at the witness. Swaying from side to side he attempted to leave the area and stepped into moving traffic.

85The witness arrested the man for public intoxication for his own safety. He was too busy dealing with the crowd to charge other intoxicated people.

86The witness took his suspect to the police station and returned to Main’s Mansion.

87When he returned, the witness observed a large crowd down the street from Main’s Mansion. Some of the crowd were fighting, others were watching.

88On cross-examination, the witness stated he saw people going in and out of Main’s Mansion although he did not see any of the people who were fighting come from the bar.

89The witness stated he saw intoxicated people coming from the premises out on to the street, but did not speak to any of them or to any staff.

90In response to questions from the panel, the witness stated the crowd in front of Main’s Mansion numbered possibly 50 people, many of whom appeared to be drunk. He did not see anyone throwing anything from the patio, or carrying liquor outside from Main’s Mansion.

Licensee’s Evidence

91Clifford Howatt works part-time for Main’s Mansion and also for a towing company. He was head of security on the night of October 11, 2008.

92The witness stated three or four security were on duty that night. It was a busy Thanksgiving holiday weekend.

93An incident took place inside the bar with two males pushing each other. The instigator - approximately 19 to 21 years old, white, short with dark hair - was ejected from the premises.

94The witness was on the steps of the premises when he noticed a group of eight to 10 intoxicated and loud people approaching from the south end of the street.

95He saw the man he had thrown out of the premises approach the group and a fight broke out between them in the middle of Main Street.

96The fight quickly included 15 to 18 people. The witness told security to call the police. They arrived four to five minutes after the fight started.

97With regard to the underage drinker, D.B., she was asked for I.D. when she came to the entrance. She presented two pieces – a Driver’s Licence and a photocopy of a Birth Certificate. She was asked her postal code and wrote out her signature, which looked like a match. She was allowed to enter.

98The witness stated he knew the woman who threw a chair – she appears to be bi-polar. She has done this before and has admitted she threw a chair. She has been banned for life from the premises.

99On cross-examination, the witness stated the crowd of 15 to 18 people were pushing and shoving each other. Only 6 to 8 of those were actually fighting.

100The whole incident in front of Main’s Mansion lasted 30 minutes.

101The witness stated I.D. is checked for anyone who appears to be under 30 years of age. If they leave and return, their I.D. is checked again.

102The witness said basic training for the staff is conducted one day a month. There is no training manual.

103Saeid Targhi has been General Manager of Main’s Mansion since it opened in May 2008. He has been in the hospitality industry since 1982. He has never had any problems with the AGCO or the police.

104At the opening of the premises, the revenue mix was 50% alcohol and 50% food. Currently the mix is 70% food and 30% alcohol.

105After the incident of October 11, 2008, the service format was changed from a pub to fine dining. In addition, breakfast and an express lunch are now served. These were not available before.

106On October 11, the witness was at the premises from 8:00 a.m. October 10 until 1:30 a.m. of October 11. Everything was fine when he left work.

107The witness lives three minutes away from the premises. At 1:37 a.m. he received a call from an employee that people were fighting in the street and AGCO Inspector Donald Anderson was at the scene.

108The witness arrived and saw people fighting in the street. The Inspector told him two people had tried to leave the premises with alcohol. The Inspector described the scene to him as “craziness” due to the long weekend.

109The witness noted that two other bars are in the area and he saw police cruisers in front of them frequently.

110Mr. Targhi stated that there is a church parking lot across the street, where many kids hang out and drink. That night he saw nine to 10 cars there with people openly drinking.

111The witness went home at 2:10 a.m. when all was calm. He did not speak to any police and was never told that anyone was drunk.

112The witness was aware of the woman who threw the chair. She is mentally challenged and he has barred her from the premises.

113The premises has instituted new measures since the incident. There is now more security and they have purchased a new “swiper” for I.D. cards.

114On cross-examination, the witness stated approximately 180 to 200 people were in the premises on the night in question. Total capacity is:

• 143 downstairs

• 77 upstairs

• 210 patio

115All these areas were open on the night of October 11, 2008.

116In response to questions from the panel, he said he had four on security that night. The security complement is now seven people a night.

Registrar’s Submissions

117It is clear a very large fight occurred in front of the premises of Main’s Mansion on the night of October 11, 2008.

118The testimony of the head of security, Clifford Howatt, grossly underestimates the event. He stated six to eight people were fighting with a maximum of 15 to 18 involved.

119Police and inspectors at the scene estimated much higher numbers and their evidence is much more credible.

120The police evidence was consistent that a fight developed at the Main’s Mansion premises and moved south down the street towards other premises. The fight did not begin elsewhere and move north to Main’s Mansion.

121Staff of the Licensee attempted to disperse the crowd but it was obvious the number of security was far too small to be effective.

122The Licensee has tacitly acknowledged this by increasing the number of security from four to seven persons on weekend nights.

123The Licensee should have phoned police immediately to disperse the crowd. Instead it was allowed to degenerate into an unruly mob.

124In this manner the license holder failed to ensure that reasonable measures were in place and reasonable efforts made to deter disorderly conduct, as required by subsection 45.1 of the O.Reg.

125Two incidents took place which resulted in a breach of subsection 30(4) of the LLA.

126Mr. Howatt, the head of security, stated he asked for two pieces of I.D. from one minor, observed her signature, and asked for her postal code. The minor testified she presented only one piece of photo I.D. Howatt looked at her and the photo several times, and then let her in.

127The minor testified at this hearing. She is 18 but looks younger. She would have been even more obviously a minor a year ago when the incident took place. Howatt did not adequately screen the minor and refuse her access to the premises.

128The minor also testified she ordered and was served alcohol by a bartender who did not ask for I.D.

129The minor testified as well to disorderly conduct in contravention of subsection 45(1) of the O.Reg. She was hit in the back of the head by a chair. A police officer corroborated her testimony that a disturbance took place on the patio and a chair was thrown.

130Regarding a breach of subsection 34(1) of the O.Reg, Inspector Anderson testified he saw a male patron leave the premises with a beer in hand as well as a female patron with a mixed drink.

131The testimony of police did not deal a lot with specifics. There was a melee and six police cruisers and a helicopter were required to contain it. The police were focussed on restoring order as opposed to making arrests for intoxication.

132The evidence is clear however, that a fight started in the premises of Main’s Mansion which spilled out into the street because insufficient security was on hand to deal with the problem.

Licensee’s Submissions

133With regard to the minor, the head of security stated he inspected two pieces of I.D. The minor looked like the photo of the eligible person on the identification. He even had her write a test signature and state her postal code.

134The minor stated the inspection of her I.D. took two to three minutes. Her card was scanned, security looked at her several times, and the photo I.D. looked very similar to herself.

135Given this level of scrutiny, it is unreasonable to suggest the Licensee did not take reasonable and appropriate measures to deter minors from entering the premises.

136There was an incident in which a chair was thrown. No allegation was made that this was a result of drunkenness. Testimony was given that the perpetrator suffers from a mental disability. She has now been barred from the premises. The Licensee cannot control behaviour unrelated to the service of alcohol.

137Inspector Anderson testified he observed a male leaving Main’s Mansion with a beer bottle. No evidence was given that it contained any beer.

138The evidence shows that a spectacle took place in front of the premises that attracted a large crowd. Security rushed out to check what was happening. The crowd went back inside the premises once requested to do so by the Inspector.

139The Inspector stated there were no drunks in the crowd. It is unclear if some in the crowd had been drinking elsewhere or at Main’s Mansion.

140Officer Kitchen stated everybody in the crowd was drunk. This is an outlandish statement inconsistent with the testimony of other witnesses.

141The police arrived after a call from the staff of the Licensee. The crowd was on the street. The police did not see how the incident originated.

142Mr. Howatt stated the affair began when two men got into a shoving match outside the premises. He saw a crowd coming up the street from two other pubs. Mr. Howatt jumped into the crowd to separate combatants, radioed for help, and asked someone to call police.

143It is true the police had a difficult time with the crowd. However, the problem began elsewhere. It is easy for crowds to get out of control but this was not due to drunkenness, as conceded by the Registrar, who withdrew that allegation at the hearing.

144In summary, this was an unfortunate incident. It was not fuelled by intoxication. The Licensee took all reasonable measures possible to operate in a responsible manner. Since he had only started operating in May, he could not have know that four security was insufficient for a holiday weekend.

145The Licensee has an excellent record and has changed the format of his premises from a pub to a dining establishment and now has seven security on weekends.

146There is not sufficient evidence basis for the allegations made against the establishment.

Registrar’s Reply Submissions

147In reply, Registrar's Counsel stated it was unreasonable to expect four security personnel to control a large bar with three huge licensed areas on a busy holiday weekend.

148The Licensee is experienced, he should have known better.

149The police did arrest drunken people in the crowd. They gave evidence of drunken people on the patio of the premises. They broke apart fights in the crowd and arrested drunks.

150The police officers were consistent in their testimony that scores of people were fighting in the street.

151Regarding the patron throwing the patio chair, the Licensee knew she was a problem and should have acted sooner to bar her.

Analysis and Reasons

152The Licensee is alleged to have breached the LLA and its regulations in several ways due to an incident that took place on October 11, 2008. The Board will address each in turn.

153It is alleged the license holder permitted patrons to remove liquor from the licensed premises.

154Inspector Anderson testified he saw a male leave the premises with a bottle of beer and a female leaving with a mixed drink. On cross-examination he stated he did not look inside either container or smell them. He could not be absolutely sure they contained alcohol. No other patrons were identified by the inspector as having removed alcohol from the premises.

155None of the three police witnesses stated they saw patrons remove liquor from Main’s Mansion.

156The evidence is not strong enough to determine, on the balance of probabilities, that liquor was removed from the premises. To determine such based on the evidence presented would be completely speculative.

157The Board, therefore, DECLINES to find the Licensee was in breach of subsection 34(1) of the O.Reg.

158It is alleged the license holder “failed to ensure reasonable measures are in place and reasonable measures are made to deter disorderly conduct on property adjacent to and in the vicinity of the premises...” as outlined in section 45.1 of the O.Reg.

159The evidence of three police officers and a liquor inspector was consistent and clear that a large disturbance took place immediately adjacent to the premises of Main’s Mansion. D.B. also testified she was hit on the back of the head by a chair thrown off the patio of the establishment.

160Cst. Lord testified that upon arrival at the premises, he saw a large fight in progress involving 30 to 40 people. This was part of an even larger crowd estimated at 150 people out in the street. He waded into the crowd in an attempt to break up fights. After arresting a man and taking him to the police station, the officer was asked to return as the area was still not under control.

161Cst. Hurst stated a large crowd was within 25 metres of Main’s Mansion and that the scene was “mayhem.” The crowd was very aggressive and he focussed on calming the crowd and breaking up fights.

162Cst. Kitchen stated he responded to a radio call to Main’s Mansion and saw people fighting on the sidewalk and in the street. No other bar or restaurant in the area was open at that hour.

163After placing a male in a cell at the police station, Cst. Kitchen returned to the scene. He testified there were still many intoxicated people around the premises and he stayed to clear the crowd.

164Inspector Anderson stated he observed two males fighting on the patio of Main’s Mansion. One was ejected. Patrons poured out of the premises and fights began between them. The situation was so volatile he called 9-1-1 within five minutes of his arrival on site.

165Main’s Mansion security head Clifford Howatt stated there were three or four security personnel on duty the night of October 11, 2008. A fight started on the patio and a patron was ejected. The ejected patron then started a fight outside that quickly included six to eight people.

166The General Manager stated the premises now has seven security on duty on weekend nights, a tacit admission the previous number was inadequate.

167It is clear from the evidence that a fight grew into a significant event involving over 100 people. The crowd was disorderly and required significant and prolonged police action to prevent a more serious incident.

168Based on the evidence above, the Board FINDS, on the balance of probabilities, that the license holder failed to ensure that reasonable measure were in place to deter disorderly conduct on the property and property in the vicinity of the premises and therefore breached subsection 45(1) of the O.Reg.

169Some of the evidence presented above also applies to the allegation that the license holder permitted “... riotous, quarrelsome, violent and disorderly conduct to occur on the premises...”

170A female minor testified she was struck in the back of the head by a chair thrown from the patio of the premises.

171The head of security for Main’s Mansion, Clifford Howatt, acknowledged the incident began with two males pushing each other inside the premises. One of them was ejected. This man then became involved in the very large fracas outside.

172Inspector Anderson testified a large crowd poured out of the premises to join in the fight taking place outside. Obviously, there was insufficient staff at the front door of the establishment to prevent patrons from leaving en mass to engage in a fight.

173Based on the evidence above, the Board FINDS the Licensee in breach of subsection 45(1) of the O.Reg.

174The final allegation is that the Licensee “... permitted a person who appeared to be under the age of 19 to have or consume liquor in the licensed premises.”

175The panel heard testimony from a female minor that she was in the licensed premises on the night of October 11, 2008. Her date of birth is September 5, 1991. Therefore, on the night in question she had just passed her 17^th birthday. Her false I.D. was accepted at the door.

176She stated she ordered “a few drinks of alcohol” from the bartender who did not ask for I.D.

177The witness stated she had patronized the bar on a previous occasion.

178No evidence was presented to refute the testimony of the witness. Nor was there any evidence regarding measures by the Licensee to ensure staff do not serve minors.

179Based on the evidence above the Board FINDS that the Licensee is in breach of subsection 30(4) of the LLA in that a minor was served alcohol on the premises.

Decision

180The Board has considered the evidence as noted above and FINDS that the Licensee breached subsections 45.1 and 45(1) of the O.Reg and subsection 30(4) of the LLA.

181The Board DECLINES to find that the Licensee committed a breach of subsection 34(1) of the O.Reg in that he permitted a patron to remove liquor from a licensed premises.

182The Board invites written submissions on penalty from the respective parties. The Registrar’s representative shall serve and file written submissions within seven (7) days of the date of this decision. The Licensee’s representative shall have seven (7) days to serve and file a written response. The Registrar’s representative may serve and file a reply within three (3) days of the receipt of the Licensee’s response. All submissions are to be filed with the Manager, Hearings Department, Alcohol and Gaming Commission, at the address on the front page of this decision in accordance with the Board’s Rules of Practice.

DATED AT TORONTO THIS 6^th DAY OF January , 2010