Licence Tribunal
Appeal d'appel en Tribunal matière de permis
DATE: 2013-12-12
FILE: 8376/LLA
CASE NAME: 8376 v. Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming
Notice of Motion by the Applicant for an Order to Extend the Time to File an Appeal under the Liquor Licence Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. L. 19 in Respect of a Revocation of Licence
Ahmed Chowdhury & Sons Ltd. o/a Toranj Resto-Bar Applicant
-and-
Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming Respondent
REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
ADJUDICATOR: Terrance Sweeney, Vice-Chair
APPEARANCES:
For the Applicant: Judit Murphy, Paralegal
For the Respondent: Tamara Brooks, Counsel
Heard in Toronto: November 22, 2013
DECISION AND ORDER
BACKGROUND
This is a hearing before the Licence Appeal Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) arising out of a Notice of Motion, dated October 3, 2013, to extend the time to allow Ahmed Chowdhury & Sons Ltd. o/a Toranj Resto-Bar (the “Applicant”) to appeal against a revocation of its licence under the Liquor Licence Act (the “Act”).
DECISION
The Tribunal has considered all of the evidence, the law, and submissions of Counsel and the Paralegal, and rules that the Applicant has failed to prove that there are reasonable grounds for the extension. Accordingly, the motion of the Applicant is dismissed and it remains without a licence under the Act for the reasons which follow.
FACTS PROVEN
The Tribunal finds that the following facts are proven:
The Registrar had a number of problems with the Applicant and a hearing before a Tribunal was scheduled for September 28, 2012.
The Applicant agreed to conditions on its licence in return for which the Registrar withdrew its claims against the Applicant and the hearing on September 28, 2012 was cancelled.
The key conditions attached to the licence on September 22, 2012 include the following:
a. Faisal Ahmed (“Faisal”) not be on or near the licensed premises.
b. Faisal was not to have any involvement with the operations of the licensed premises.
c. Faisal was not to be employed in any capacity.
The Applicant agreed to pay $250.00 by way of monetary penalty, under the Alcohol and Gaming Regulation and Public Protection Act, R.S.O. 1996, c. 26, in August 2013.
In a letter dated July 2, 2013,1 Mr. G. Goldman, a lawyer for the Applicant, told the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (“AGCO”) that, among other things, “Mrs. [Nazrin] Chowdhury never attends at the Toranj Resto-Bar and leaves the running of the establishment to the manager, Mr. Zamil Kawser”.
The Paralegal for the Applicant conceded at the hearing that Faisal was seen at the licensed premises on three occasions.
The Registrar issued a Notice of Proposal and an amended Notice of Proposal, both dated September 13, 2013,2 to revoke the licence of the Applicant. This Notice of Proposal was served personally on Mrs. Chowdhury on September 13, 2013.
The Applicant failed to file an appeal within the 15 days allowed and the Registrar revoked its licence on October 1, 2013.
EVIDENCE FOR THE APPLICANT
A summary of the Applicant’s evidence follows.
Nazrin Chowdhury is the sole owner of all of the issued shares in the Applicant. She is married to Faisal whom, she says, she is divorcing. She is the mother of three sons aged 10 to 13.
She agreed that she received the Notice of Proposal to revoke the licence of the Applicant on September 13, 2013. She said that Faisal and the manager spoke to a lawyer, Mr. Winch, who said, “I can do.” She blamed the lawyer for not filing the appeal on time.
Her Representative filed a copy of an email, dated September 25, 2013,3 from Mr. Winch’s office to Faisal in which one of Mr. Winch’s employees told him to have his wife contact the office as soon as possible to sign the appeal notice.
The Applicant’s Paralegal also filed an itinerary for Faisal, dated September 22, 2013,4 which shows that he was to depart for Cuba on September 25, 2013.
Ms. Brooks vigorously cross-examined Mrs. Chowdhury. She said that she hired the manager in 2012 when the conditions attached to the licence and ordered him not to allow Faisal in the premises. Notwithstanding this, she conceded that Faisal was on the premises in the summer of 2013. She said that she was annoyed with the manager, Mr. Kawser, but did not fire him.
Ms. Brooks asked her if she took out the licence because Faisal could not as he was facing drinking and driving charges at the time. She denied this. Ms. Brooks put Mr. Goldman’s letter to her and asked her if it was true that she never attends the premises. She could not answer.
The Vice-Chair asked her twice to answer the following question “Yes” or “No”: “Did you or did you not tell Mr. Goldman what he said in his letter to the AGCO?”. She declined to answer.
Ms. Brooks asked her to name her employees. She did not know the last names