OLAT 2013

The applicant appealed the impoundment of her motor vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act.

The vehicle was impounded after being driven by a suspended driver.

The applicant testified that she had left the vehicle at home for her son's emergency use and that the suspended driver, an acquaintance of her boarder, took the keys without permission.

The Tribunal found the applicant credible and concluded that the vehicle was 'stolen' within the meaning of the Act, as it was taken without her consent.

The Tribunal ordered the Registrar to release the motor vehicle.

The applicant appealed the 45-day impoundment of his motor vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act, arguing that the loss of the vehicle would result in exceptional hardship.

The vehicle was impounded after the applicant's son loaned it to a friend whose driver's licence was suspended for an impaired driving conviction.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had alternative transportation options, including the use of his wife's vehicle and public transit.

As the applicant failed to demonstrate that no alternative to the impounded vehicle was available, the exceptional hardship criteria were not met.

The appeal was dismissed and the impoundment was confirmed.

The Applicant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend his driver's licence due to a reported seizure disorder.

The suspension followed a physician's report indicating the Applicant had multiple seizures, including one while driving.

The Applicant argued the seizure was caused by a reduction in his medication and disputed the physician's report.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the Registrar acted properly in suspending the licence and requiring updated medical information from a physician, rather than a chiropractor, to ensure the safety of the Applicant and the public.

The appeal was dismissed and the suspension confirmed.

The applicant appealed the impoundment of his motor vehicle under section 50.2 of the Highway Traffic Act.

The applicant argued that he exercised due diligence in attempting to determine that his driver's licence was not suspended, and that the impoundment would result in exceptional hardship.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had valid reasons for believing his licence was current, having contacted both his counsel and the Ministry of Transportation to clarify his status after receiving conflicting information.

The Tribunal concluded that the applicant exercised due diligence and ordered the Registrar to release the motor vehicle.

The applicant appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar to refuse his registration under the Motor Vehicle Dealers Act, 2002.

The parties reached a settlement and requested a consent order without a hearing pursuant to section 4.1 of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal issued the consent order, imposing conditions on the applicant's registration, including obligations regarding disclosure of vehicle history, odometer readings, and restrictions on his role within a dealership for five years.

The applicants appealed a decision by Tarion Warranty Corporation denying their new home warranty claims regarding the placement of a fireplace, the removal of an upstairs foyer, and markings on hardwood flooring.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found insufficient evidence of a verbal agreement to center the fireplace to the kitchen, and no evidence that the removal of the fireplace bump-out constituted an inferior substitution.

The Tribunal also found the applicants had requested the changes that eliminated the upstairs hallway, and that the hardwood floor markings were likely due to normal wear and tear.

The appeal was dismissed and Tarion was directed to deny the claim in full.

The Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming issued a Notice of Proposal to revoke the applicant's liquor licence, alleging that the spouse of the licensee, who had an extensive criminal record, was secretly managing the business and that the applicant had made false statements by failing to disclose his involvement.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the spouse was not responsible for the management or operation of the business, but merely assisted occasionally.

The Tribunal ordered the Registrar not to carry out the proposal to revoke the licence, subject to a condition that the spouse be excluded from behind the service bar during operating hours.

The applicants appealed a decision by Tarion Warranty Corporation denying warranty claims for cracked and cupped hardwood flooring and a central vacuum hose that was too short.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicants were not precluded from claiming for 'cupped' boards despite not using that exact term initially.

However, because the applicants only reported two cracked boards within the one-year warranty period, claims for additional boards discovered later were dismissed.

The tribunal also found that obtaining a vacuum hose of the correct length was the homeowners' responsibility.

The appeal was dismissed.

The applicant appealed the 45-day impoundment of his motor vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act on the ground of exceptional hardship.

The applicant, whose driver's licence was suspended for three years following a Criminal Code conviction, was driving the vehicle at the time of impoundment.

He argued that the impoundment would cause exceptional hardship leading to bankruptcy.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal and confirmed the impoundment, finding that the applicant failed to meet the criteria for exceptional hardship because an alternative mode of transportation (his wife's vehicle) was available, and the alleged hardship would principally impact the suspended driver.

The applicant appealed the impoundment of her motor vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act.

The vehicle was impounded after the applicant's husband was caught driving it while his licence was suspended.

The applicant argued that the vehicle was stolen, as she had removed the licence plates and hidden the keys to prevent her husband from driving.

The Tribunal found the applicant's testimony credible and concluded that the vehicle was taken without her permission.

The appeal was allowed and the Registrar was ordered to release the motor vehicle.

The Applicant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend his driver's licence due to a reported alcohol-related seizure and alcohol dependence.

Medical evidence revealed the initial diagnosis was flawed and the seizures were actually caused by a cerebral spinal fluid infection (meningitis), not alcohol withdrawal.

The Tribunal found the Applicant does not have alcohol dependence and is fully recovered.

The Registrar's decision to suspend the licence was set aside.

The Applicant appealed a decision by Tarion Warranty Corporation denying her claims regarding a new home purchased from the Added Party.

The claims involved noise transmission through a party wall, squeaky stairs, and mould stains in the basement.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the party wall met the Ontario Building Code's sound transmission standards, there was no evidence of a defect in the stairs, and the mould stains did not constitute a warrantable defect.

The Tribunal also dismissed the Applicant's claims for secondary damages and human rights violations, noting that secondary damages are excluded under the Ontario New Home Warranties Plan Act and there was no evidence of discrimination.

The applicant appealed the impoundment of her motor vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act, arguing exceptional hardship.

The vehicle was impounded after her son drove it while his license was suspended.

The applicant provided evidence that she was facing eviction due to rent arrears and had a prospective buyer for the vehicle, but the sale was contingent on its release from impoundment.

The Tribunal found the applicant credible and concluded that the impending eviction and potential loss of the vehicle sale constituted exceptional hardship.

The Registrar was ordered to release the motor vehicle.

The applicant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her motor vehicle after it was driven by a suspended driver.

She sought an extension of time to appeal, which the Tribunal granted.

On the merits, the applicant argued the impoundment caused exceptional hardship because she is a single mother who relies on the vehicle for personal use and medical appointments.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the applicant had reasonable alternatives, such as public transportation, and therefore failed to establish exceptional hardship under the Highway Traffic Act.

The applicant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend her driver's licence under section 47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act.

The suspension was based on a medical condition report indicating alcohol and drug dependence.

The applicant failed to submit a required Substance Abuse Assessment form and confirmation of abstinence.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the Registrar was justified in suspending the licence and continuing the suspension in the absence of medical information supporting reinstatement.

The Registrar's decision was confirmed.

The applicant appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar to impose terms and conditions on his registration as a motor vehicle salesperson.

The parties reached a settlement and requested a consent order without a hearing.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal issued a consent order incorporating the agreed terms and conditions, which replaced a previous order from 2004 and allowed the applicant to act in a management or ownership position at a dealership.

The applicant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act, arguing that the impoundment caused exceptional hardship.

The vehicle was impounded after the applicant's boyfriend was caught driving it while his licence was suspended.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the applicant failed to meet the criteria for exceptional hardship because she had access to alternative transportation, specifically public transit and rides from co-workers.

The applicant appealed a Notice of Decision by the Registrar of the Retirement Homes Regulatory Authority refusing to issue a licence.

At the pre-hearing, the parties presented a settlement agreement wherein the Registrar agreed to issue the licence subject to specific conditions.

The Tribunal reviewed the agreement, confirmed the applicant's understanding and capacity to comply, and ordered the Registrar to issue the licence subject to the agreed conditions.

The applicant appealed the 45-day impoundment of his motor vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act.

The vehicle was impounded after the applicant's son-in-law was caught driving it while his licence was suspended for impaired driving.

The applicant argued the vehicle was stolen because he had forbidden his son-in-law from driving it, and that the impoundment caused exceptional hardship.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding no exceptional hardship as the applicant had another vehicle available.

The Tribunal also found the vehicle was not stolen, as the applicant had loaned it to his daughter, who then permitted her husband to drive it, meaning there was no intent to deprive the owner.

The applicant appealed the 45-day impoundment of its motor vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act, arguing that the impoundment would cause exceptional hardship to its farming business.

The vehicle had been driven by a suspended driver after the applicant's employee lent it to him.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the vehicle was not stolen and that the applicant failed to establish exceptional hardship because it owned several other farm vehicles, meaning alternatives were available.