Licence Appeal Tribunal
Appeal d'appel en matière de permis
FILE: 7868/MED
CASE NAME: 7868 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: 7868
-and-
Respondent: Registrar of Motor Vehicles
REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
ADJUDICATOR: D. Ian Turnbull, MD, Member
APPEARANCES:
For the Applicant: Self-Represented
For the Respondent: Russell McKnight, Agent
Heard in Toronto: February 13, 2013
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”).
FACTS
The Applicant is a 62-year-old pensioner with a long history of mental illness, including a reported diagnosis of schizophrenia. Against medical advice, he discontinued Trifluoperazine in 2008.
The Registrar received a Medical Condition Report dated October 27, 2010 (Exhibit 3, Tab 1) stating "schizophrenic, active paranoid delusions".
The Registrar suspended the Applicant's driving privileges in a letter dated October 28, 2010 (Exhibit 3, Tab 2) and requested that the Applicant supply medical information regarding his psychiatric condition.
The Applicant's driver's licence suspension was effective November 7, 2010.
Reporting pursuant to Section 203 of the Highway Traffic Act (HTA), another physician sent in a Medical Condition Report (Exhibit 3, Tab 10) dated March 21, 2012, indicating Mental or Emotional Illness (unstable). To this date, the Applicant has not supplied the requested medical information to the Registrar. The Applicant says "the government" already has his medical records. The Registrar's Agent correctly points out the Applicant's medical records can only be supplied to the Medical Review Section with the Applicant's consent.
In his testimony, the Applicant says only, "I cannot find a doctor," and in his summary says only, "I'm still looking for a doctor." He adds that it is "terribly hard to find a doctor and terribly hard to find an honest doctor."
To date, the Applicant has not supplied the Registrar with the Mental Health Assessment Form (MHAF) attached to the letter dated June 26, 2012 (Exhibit 3, Tab 12) which was to have been completed with his physician and returned to the Medical Review Section.
The Applicant complained to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) regarding the physician who sent the initial Medical Condition Report (Exhibit 3, Tab 1). The Applicant wanted "a criminal investigation into both harassment and medical malice and bullying/ covering for each other" (Exhibit 2). He believes the Medical Condition Report was sent in because he refused to resume his medication. He stated "the original error of the reporting physician (Exhibit 3, Tab 1) who was exonerated by the College for malicious wrongdoing which "I suggest incriminates the College".
The Registrar's tabbed submission (Exhibit 3, Tabs 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9) is a sample of the Applicant’s numerous communications with the Registrar including, what he believes is evidence of a widespread conspiracy involving physicians, lawyers, hospitals, MTO, CPSO, US Military, organized crime. These communications consist of:
hand-written letters, e-mails, faxes
copies of articles from a variety of sources (magazines, newspapers)
Internet article
copies of letters to hospitals
In a letter dated January 29, 2013 (Exhibit 3, Tab 15), he states in part, "I suspect the doctor of malice. I am currently under surveillance and the police could not give a damn about it. Who the hell has me under surveillance? OPP? Have you seen surveillance issues which indicates that the US military does it on the pretext for make-work projects for goofballs. Not the only ones."
He is alluding to a an Internet website (Exhibit 3, Tab 15a) which "contains information relating to advanced satellite surveillance and "harassment" technologies which are made available to covert government agencies and organized crime syndicates."
The Applicant also challenged the Medical Condition Report of March 2, 2012 (Exhibit 3, Tab 10). "I suspect police and hospital investigators would/ will reveal wrong-doing on the part of the doctor. Criminal charge of malice (covering up for friends who also acted stupidly.)"
The Applicant believes he is "under surveillance, which is tactile and possibly coming from the U.S. Military." He admits he has no military knowledge and can only guess why they "want to shut me up." He says he is not paranoid about it and is not schizophrenic. He says he is "chemically impaired." The so-called auditory hallucinations are normal, i.e. conversational, rather than incomprehensible.
The Applicant states he is not mentally ill and has no need for either medical monitoring or medication. He believes he is a safe driver, if given the chance.
The Applicant states he has had a Form I on three occasions during his frequent encounters with hospital emergency rooms and crisis centres.
His certified driving records (Exhibit 3, Tab 16) dated January 24, 2013, show no demerit points.
ISSUES
Should the decision of the Registrar to suspend the Applicant’s licence be confirmed, modified or set aside?
Does the Applicant suffer from a mental, emotional, nervous or physical disability likely to significantly interfere with his or her ability to drive a motor vehicle safely?
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,
(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) 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 Tribunal finds the Registrar has made the case for contirmation of the suspension of the Applicant's driving privileges, for the following reasons..
The Registrar makes the following points:
The Applicant's driving privileges were appropriately suspended following receipt of his physician's letter of October 27, 2010 (Exhibit 3, Tab 1).
The Applicant has not responded to two reasonable requests to provide up-to-date medical information (Exhibit 3, Tabs 2 and 11), following receipt of two Medical Condition Reports, separated by 18 months.
The medical information requested by the Registrar is detailed in a letter dated April 5, 2012 (Exhibit 3, Tab 9a), responding to the Applicant's correspondence of March 7, March 8, March 14 and March 24, 2012. The Registrar asks the Applicant's physician to provide the Medical Review Section with:
a complete psychiatric history
reference to any hospitalization(s), if any, including discharge summary of most recent
details of compliance with recommended treatment
reference to frequency/ rapidity of decompensation, signs of impaired judgement, reduced concentration, reckless/ aggressive behaviour and any adverse effects due to medication
confirmation of emotional stability and reference to current level of functioning
The Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (CCMTA) standard for psychiatric disorders is set out in Exhibit 3, Tab 17), Page 216.
14.6.1 Guidelines for assessment - Psychiatric disorder - All drivers
Standard - All drivers eligible for a licence if
the condition is stable
the driver has sufficient insight to stop driving if condition becomes acute
the functional abilities necessary for driving are not impaired
a treating physician supports a return to driving, for drivers who have stopped driving due to a psychiatric disorder, and
the conditions for maintaining a licence are met
The CCMTA Guidelines, Section 14.4, "Effect on functional ability to drive," "the role of insight," Page 213, states "a driver's level of insight is a critical consideration when assessing the risk of an episodic impairment of functional ability due to a psychiatric disorder."
The Applicant believes he "has no illness at all," and a doctor should give him an immediate "clear bill of health," and his driving privileges would be restored. The Applicant also believes he needs neither physician support, nor medication. The Applicant’s apparent lack of insight is a significant consideration for the Tribunal.
Until the requested information has been received by the Registrar and reviewed by the Medical Review Section, there should be no consideration of restoring the Applicant's driving privileges.
The Tribunal refers specifically to the Act.
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.
In the interest of public safety and the Applicant's safety, the Tribunal finds the Applicant must supply the Registrar with the requested reasonable medical information before consideration of restoration of his driving privileges.
DECISION
Upon the application by the Applicant to appeal the decision dated October 28, 2010 (effective November 7, 2010) 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
D. Ian Turnbull, MD, Presiding Member
RELEASED: February 21, 2013