Elizabeth Maishlish

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

The Registrar's refusal was based on the applicant's recent criminal conviction for breaking and entering and theft over $5,000, as well as allegations of unregistered trading.

While the Tribunal found the evidence of unregistered trading to be a misunderstanding, it upheld the refusal based on the applicant's criminal record.

The Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not demonstrated a sustained period of unsupervised positive conduct since completing his conditional sentence, and therefore his past conduct afforded reasonable grounds to believe he would not carry on business with honesty and integrity.

The applicant brought a motion for an extension of time to file an appeal of the Registrar's proposal to refuse his registration as a motor vehicle salesperson.

The applicant had filed a timely appeal on behalf of his dealership but inadvertently failed to file a separate appeal for his personal registration.

Applying the four factors from Manuel v. Registrar, the Tribunal found a bona fide intention to appeal, a short delay of seven days, no prejudice to the Registrar, and sufficient merit to warrant a hearing.

The motion for an extension of time was granted.

The applicants appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar to revoke their registrations under the Motor Vehicle Dealers Act, 2002.

During a pre-hearing, the parties reached a settlement and requested a consent order.

The Tribunal ordered that the dealership's appeal be withdrawn, resulting in the immediate revocation of its registration.

The individual applicant's registration was suspended for 12 months, with reinstatement conditional upon completing an ethics course, securing approved employment, and maintaining a clean record.

The individual also agreed to restrictions on future roles and applications.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal to refuse the applicant's registration as a motor vehicle salesperson.

The applicant failed to attend the hearing.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had numerous criminal and driving convictions, unpaid fines, and had repeatedly made false statements on his applications for registration.

The Tribunal concluded that the applicant could not reasonably be expected to be financially responsible, would not carry on business with honesty and integrity, and had provided false statements.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar to carry out the proposal to refuse registration and ordered the applicant to pay costs of $1,200.