Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario

A pre-hearing teleconference was held regarding a Notice of Proposal to suspend the liquor licence of the Plaza Hotel.

The Board ordered the Licensee and the Registrar to provide mutual disclosure, including witness lists and evidence summaries, at least 10 days prior to the scheduled hearing.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposed Order to revoke the Registrant's registration as a gaming supplier after the Registrant pled guilty to keeping a device for gambling under the Criminal Code.

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

The Board accepted the joint submission, ordering a 21-day suspension of the registration and imposing ongoing conditions, including a prohibition on unlicensed gaming machines on the premises.

The Board previously found that the licensee breached the Liquor Licence Act and ordered a 12-day suspension of its liquor licence.

The licensee proposed suspension dates which were acceptable to the Board.

The Board ordered the 12-day suspension to commence on March 22, 2011.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to suspend the licensee's liquor licence for failing to verify the identity of minors and allowing them to consume outside liquor.

At the hearing, the parties submitted an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission on Disposition.

The Board found the licensee breached the regulations and ordered a four-day suspension of the liquor licence.

Following a finding that the licensee breached the Liquor Licence Act regulations, the Board ordered a three-day suspension of its liquor licence and requested the licensee propose suspension dates.

The licensee proposed dates that were unacceptable to the Board and failed to propose alternate dates.

Consequently, the Board ordered the three-day suspension to commence on March 26, 2011.

At a pre-hearing conference regarding a Notice of Proposal to suspend the liquor licence of ZU BAR, the Board of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario ordered mutual disclosure of witness lists, evidence summaries, and documents ten days prior to the scheduled hearing date.

Following a finding that the licensee violated the Liquor Licence Act by permitting overcrowding, failing to position security staff as required, and allowing a patron to openly roll and consume marijuana, the Board held a hearing to determine the appropriate sanction.

The Registrar sought a 30-day suspension, while the licensee argued for a maximum of 5 days.

The Board found the violations serious, particularly the repeated overcrowding and the staff's failure to address open marijuana use.

The Board ordered a 15-day suspension of the liquor licence.

The Board of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario held a pre-hearing tele-conference regarding a Notice of Proposal to suspend the liquor licence of 7106432 Canada Inc. The Board ordered the Licensee to disclose its witness list and a detailed summary of each witness's evidence to the Registrar's Representative 10 days before the hearing.

The Registrar's Representative was also ordered to complete any further disclosure 10 days before the hearing.

The Registrar of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario issued a Notice of Proposal to revoke the liquor licence of the respondent licensee.

The parties submitted an Agreed Statement of Facts admitting to multiple violations of the Liquor Licence Act and its regulations, including failing to clear signs of service, permitting drunken patrons, serving liquor after hours, and failing to have a manager supervising the premises.

The Board accepted the joint submission, suspending the liquor licence for 28 days and amending the licence conditions to require two licensed security guards.

The Board of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario held a tele-conference pre-hearing regarding a Notice of Proposal to revoke and immediately suspend the liquor licence of the corporate licensee.

The Board ordered both the Registrar and the licensee to provide mutual disclosure, including witness lists and evidence summaries, ten days prior to the scheduled hearing date.

The Registrar of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario sought to suspend the liquor licence of the respondent establishment for serving alcohol to a minor without checking identification.

Following a finding of liability in a previous decision, the Board considered the appropriate sanction.

The Registrar sought a 12 to 14-day suspension, while the licensee requested a penalty at the low end of the range, citing its unblemished record and established policies.

The Board found the contravention extremely serious, noting the minor consumed alcohol at the bar in full view of the server for over two hours.

The Board ordered a 12-day suspension of the liquor licence.

The applicant applied for a liquor licence for the Waterfront Dome, a domed structure in Wasaga Beach.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to review the application after receiving objections from local residents.

The objectors argued that the dome was a temporary structure lacking permanent washrooms and kitchens, and raised concerns about noise.

The Board found that structural and municipal compliance matters are for the Registrar and the municipality to decide, not the Board.

The Board concluded that the objectors failed to prove that issuing the licence would be against the public interest, and approved the application.

The Registrar of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario issued an Order of Immediate Suspension against a registered gaming assistant after he was charged with ten serious criminal offences, including sexual assault and making and possessing child pornography.

The Registrant requested a hearing.

The Board heard evidence from the police investigator regarding the allegations, which involved a hidden camera in a bathroom and sexual abuse of minors.

The Board found that the serious nature of the charges raised significant concerns regarding the integrity of the gaming industry and the public interest.

The Board upheld the immediate suspension until the criminal charges are concluded.

The Registrar of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario issued a Notice of Proposal to suspend the liquor licence of Melanie Pringle's Restaurant Inc. following an incident where inspectors observed patrons with alcoholic beverages after hours and an employee attempted to conceal the evidence.

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

The Board accepted the joint submission, finding the licensee breached the Liquor Licence Act and its regulations, and ordered a five-day suspension of the liquor licence.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to suspend the Licensee's liquor licence, alleging that the Licensee obstructed a police investigation by cleaning up the scene of an assault before officers could inspect it, contrary to s. 45(1) of the Liquor Licence Act.

At the hearing, the responding police officers testified that they attended the premises to assist an ambulance and did not conduct or attempt to conduct an inspection under the Act.

At the close of the Registrar's case, the Licensee brought a motion for non-suit.

The Board granted the motion, finding no evidence that the police were conducting an inspection under the Act or that the Licensee interfered with one.

The allegations were dismissed.

A pre-hearing conference was held regarding a Notice of Proposal to suspend the liquor licence of Kaytoo Restaurant & Bar.

The Board ordered both the Licensee and the Registrar to complete disclosure of witness lists and evidence summaries by April 18, 2011, ahead of the scheduled hearing in May 2011.

The Licensee appealed an Order of Monetary Penalty issued by the Registrar of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario for permitting more persons in the licensed premises than the maximum capacity allowed.

The parties submitted an Agreed Statement of Facts admitting that there were up to 275 persons in an area licensed for 196 persons, in violation of section 43 of Ontario Regulation 719/90 under the Liquor Licence Act.

The Board upheld the violation and confirmed the agreed monetary penalty of $2,000.

The Registrar of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario sought to suspend a liquor licence following an incident where a patron left the establishment and was subsequently arrested for impaired driving with a blood alcohol concentration nearly three times the legal limit.

The Licensee admitted to serving liquor outside prescribed hours.

The Board found insufficient evidence that the patron appeared intoxicated when initially served, dismissing the allegation under section 29 of the Liquor Licence Act.

However, the Board found the Licensee breached subsection 45(1) of O.Reg 719/90 by permitting drunkenness on the premises, as the patron consumed a large quantity of alcohol over two hours without any staff monitoring or intervention, and would have shown obvious signs of intoxication well before leaving.

During a hearing to suspend a liquor licence for allegedly serving intoxicated patrons, the Licensee brought a motion for non-suit after the Registrar's case.

The Board dismissed the non-suit motion.

The Registrar then brought a motion arguing that the Licensee should be deemed to have elected not to call evidence because they did not make a formal election when bringing the non-suit motion.

The Board dismissed the Registrar's motion, finding that administrative tribunals have discretion to control their own processes and that fairness dictated allowing the Licensee to call evidence, especially since the Registrar did not raise the election issue at the time the non-suit motion was made.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to revoke the Licensee's liquor licence on the basis of financial irresponsibility, specifically citing significant Retail Sales Tax (RST) arrears owed to the Ministry of Revenue.

The Licensee presented evidence of a business turnaround plan, including reduced operating hours, a rent waiver from the landlord, and substantial payments made towards the arrears since the initial hearing date.

The Board found that the Licensee had demonstrated a commitment to repaying the debt and could reasonably be expected to be financially responsible in the conduct of the business.

The allegation was dismissed.