Licence Appeal Tribunal
FILE: 7559/MED
CASE NAME: 7559 v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles
Appeal under Section 50(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, from a Decision of the Registrar of Motor Vehicles Pursuant to Section 47(1) of that Act - to Suspend a Licence
Applicant: 7559
-and-
Respondent: Registrar of Motor Vehicles
REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
ADJUDICATOR: Kevin Flynn
APPEARANCES:
For the Applicant: Self-represented
For the Respondent: Kyle M Biel, Agent
Heard in Ottawa: August 30, 2012
DECISION AND REASONS
This is an appeal to the Licence Appeal Tribunal by the Applicant respecting a decision of the Registrar of Motor Vehicles (the “Registrar”) pursuant to section 47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8 (the “Act”) effective April 27, 2012.
FACTS
The Respondent’s Case:
An unsolicited Medical Condition Report was completed in accordance with Section 203 of the Act, by a specialist in Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Dr Q. on March 22, 2012.
The condition reported was:
Stroke/TIA or Head injury with significant deficits.
(Applicant) has had a traumatic brain injury on January 26, 2012 which has affected his cognition & may affect his ability to drive.
Has been my patient for two months.
The Registrar informed the Applicant on April 18, 2012 that it had been decided to suspend his driving privilege under Section 47(1) of the Act.
In order to be considered for reinstatement he was requested to take the Registrar’s letter to his treating physician or specialist who would arrange for the following information to be sent to the Medical Review Section. The report was to include:
- Confirmation that all risk factors have been addressed
(a) The results of all investigations conducted, (b) treatment, (c) current status, (d) confirmation that the condition is controlled, (e) confirmation that the condition is controlled
He was informed that he may request an Administrative Review or may appeal the suspension to the Licence Appeal Tribunal.
Upon receiving correspondence from the Applicant that included Reasons for Appeal, and supportive affidavits from members of his family, and his employer, the Registrar wrote to the Applicant on August 13, 2012 informing him that the information previously requested had not been received.
Enclosed was a form to be completed by his treating physician, specialist or nurse practitioner. This form was entitled “Cerebrovascular Diseases Traumatic Brain Injury/Tumour or Other Neurological Diseases”
The form requested detailed information concerning the reported condition.
On August 22, 2012, the form was completed and returned to the Ministry by a nurse practitioner, Mr. B. it stated as follows:
Primary Diagnosis:
Subarachnoid Hemorrhage; Traumatic Brain Injury
Current Status:
Unknown as unaware of deficits or of symptoms
Underlying cause has been identified
Has the condition been resolved?:
Unknown
Does the patient have appropriate insight of his medical condition and the impacts on functional ability to drive?
Unknown
Has the patient been referred for an independent driving assessment?
No. Consideration for driving assessment if cognitive concerns recommended
Additional comments:
Please see DISCHARGE SUMMARY from Dr. M. I only met (Applicant) June 23/12.
I have never seen him on a regular basis. Last meeting was 2005.
I had recommended reassessment by Dr. M.. (Applicant) & wife declined.
I am unaware of what his cognitive deficits are.
Referral to Physiatrist recommended. Declined.
The Tribunal was informed that no further medical reports have been received by the Ministry by date of hearing.
The Applicant’s Case:
The Applicant was a stationary engineer in the process of repairing some lights at a commercial establishment for his employer on January 26,2012. He received an electric shock and fell approximately three feet striking his head on a cement surface.
He recovered consciousness at the hospital where he remained for four weeks. He had received burns to his right hand. A CT Scan of his head showed slight bleeding and a small fracture at the base of his skull. He had no memory of the fall.
He made a partial recovery but required speech therapy and was transferred to the Rehabilitation Centre,
He remained at the Rehab Centre for two and a half weeks, received speech therapy and was fully mobile. When he was discharged, he was informed that he must not drive..
Upon receiving the Brain Injury Form he took it to the Nurse Practitioner office where his wife attended.
He informed the Tribunal that he did not have follow-up appointments with Dr. M. and was unable to say what Dr. M. had recommended at the Rehab Centre other than being advised not to drive.
ISSUES
Should the decision of the Registrar to suspend the Applicant’s licence be confirmed, modified or set aside?
LAW
O. Reg. 340/94, Section 14 states:
(1) An applicant for or a holder of a driver’s licence must not,
(a) suffer from any mental, emotional, nervous or physical condition or disability likely to significantly interfere with his or her ability to drive a motor vehicle of the applicable class safely; or
(b) be addicted to the use of alcohol or a drug to an extent likely to significantly interfere with his or her ability to drive a motor vehicle safely.
(2) In determining whether an applicant for or a holder of a driver’s licence of any class meets the qualifications described in subsection (1), the Minister,
(a) may take into consideration the relevant medical standards for applicants or holders of that class of driver’s licence set out in the CCMTA Medical Standards for Drivers; and
(b) may require the applicant or holder to provide evidence satisfactory to the Minister that he or she is able to drive a motor vehicle of the applicable class safely, including,
(i) any reports of examinations under section 15, and
(ii) any additional medical information.
(3) Despite clause (2) (a) and unless otherwise provided in this Regulation, if there is a difference between a medical standard set out in the CCMTA Medical Standards for Drivers and a medical standard set out in this Regulation, the Minister shall take into consideration the standard set out in this Regulation instead of the standard set out in the CCMTA Medical Standards for Drivers.
(4) In this section, the CCMTA Medical Standards for Drivers means the document entitled CCMTA Medical Standards for Drivers, published by the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators and dated March 2009, as it may be amended from time to time, that is available on the Internet through the website of the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators.
Section 47(1) states:
Subject to section 47.1, the Registrar may suspend or cancel,
(b) a driver’s licence; …
on the grounds of,
(d) misconduct for which the holder is responsible, directly or indirectly, related to the operation or driving of a motor vehicle;
(e) conviction of the holder for an offence referred to in subsection 210(1) or (2);
(f) the Registrar having reason to believe, having regard to the safety record of the holder or of a person related to the holder, and any other information that the Registrar considers relevant, that the holder will not operate a commercial motor vehicle safely or in accordance with this Act, the regulations and other laws relating to highway safety; or
(g) any other sufficient reason not referred to in clause (d), (e) or (f).
Section 50 of the Act states:
50 (1) Every person aggrieved by a decision of the Minister made under subsection 32(5) for which there is a right of appeal pursuant to a regulation made under clause 32 (14) (n) or a decision of the Registrar under section 17 or 47 may appeal the decision to the Tribunal.
(2) The Tribunal may confirm, modify or set aside the decision of the Minister or the Registrar.
APPLICATION OF THE LAW TO FACTS
The Respondent relies on the following.
The Medical Condition report filed on March 22, 2012 by a Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation specialist pursuant to Section 203 of the Act stating that the Applicant had sustained a traumatic brain injury and that his cognitive function and driving ability may be affected. Therefore the Registrar was justified in issuing a suspension of the Applicant’s driving privilege under Section 47(1)(g) of the Act.
There has been no medical evidence filed to support reinstatement.
Ontario Regulation 340/94 Section 14 (a) states:
(1) An applicant for or a holder of a driver’s licence must not,
(a) suffer from any mental, emotional, nervous or physical condition or disability likely to significantly interfere with his or her ability to drive a motor vehicle of the applicable class safely;
- The Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators Section 6.9 states that following a history of significant head injury with loss of consciousness, the individual should be subject to a thorough medical review including assessments of cognitive and motor functions before being allowed to operate a motor vehicle.
The Applicant informed the Tribunal that he now has a better understanding of what is required by the Registrar in order to be considered for reinstatement.
The Tribunal finds that the Registrar was justified in issuing a suspension of the Applicant’s driving privilege upon receipt of a Medical Condition report filed pursuant to Section 203 of the Act which states the Applicant’s condition to be traumatic brain injury with significant deficits.
The Tribunal finds that there has been no medical report filed to support reinstatement.
DECISION
Upon the application by the Applicant to appeal the decision dated April 27, 2012 of the Registrar to suspend his driver’s licence pursuant to Section 47(1) of the Act, and having considered the evidence filed with the Tribunal, and the submissions of the Registrar and of the Applicant;
IT IS THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL pursuant to the authority vested in it under section 50(2) of the Act that the decision of the Registrar be confirmed.
LICENCE APPEAL TRIBUNAL
KEVIN FLYNN, Presiding Member
RELEASED: September 5, 2012