Licence Tribunal
Appeal d'appel en
Tribunal matière de permis
DATE:
2014-03-13
FILE:
8620/MED
CASE NAME:
8620 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
Applicant
-and-
Registrar of Motor Vehicles
Respondent
REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
ADJUDICATOR:
Kevin Flynn, M.D., Member
APPEARANCES:
For the Applicant:
Self-represented
For the Respondent:
Kyle Biel, Agent
Heard in Toronto:
March 5, 2014
DECISION AND REASONS
This is an appeal to the Licence Appeal Tribunal (the “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 Respondent’s Evidence
The Applicant is appealing a suspension of her driving privilege under section 47(1) of the Act, effective January 31, 2014.
The suspension was based upon a Medical Condition Report completed on January 16, 2014 by Dr. M. a psychiatrist, in compliance with section 203 of the Highway Traffic Act (the Act).
The condition reported was based on examination on January 16, 2014 and stated:
Alcohol Dependence
Concerns re: alcohol use and driving
Patient is aware of this report
On January 21, 2014 the Registrar informed the Applicant by letter that her driving privilege was suspended pursuant to section 47 (1) of the Act.
In order to be considered for reinstatement she was required to take this letter to her treating physician, specialist of nurse practitioner when her condition improved and to submit a detailed up-to-date report by her physician, to include the following:
If her physician confirms a diagnosis of alcohol dependence, the ministry will require confirmation that she has remained abstinent from alcohol for a period of one year. This period may be reduced if her physician confirms that she has successfully completed an alcohol treatment program and is supportive of her driving privilege
The enclosed Substance Abuse Form must be completed and all questions answered.
She was informed that all the requested information must be provided or it may result in a delay of her review.
The Applicant submitted results of laboratory tests performed on the following dates:
Date MCV (80-100) GGT (5-36) ALT (<33) AST Alk Phos (40-114)
01/10/13 96 15 35 19 80
21/02/14 93 11 29 N 67
The Registrar reviewed the laboratory results and informed the Applicant by letter on March 3, 2014 that the information previously requested has not been received.
She was requested to take the letter to her physician and to have the Substance Abuse Assessment form completed. If the physician confirms a diagnosis of alcohol dependence, confirmation will be required of abstinence from alcohol for a period of one year. This period may be reduced if the physician confirms that she has successfully completed an alcohol treatment program and is supportive of reinstatement.
Mr. Biel submitted the driver’s record that shows two speeding offences in 2012.
The Applicant’s Evidence
The Applicant informed the Tribunal that on the evening before the Medical Condition Report was completed she had consumed ten bottles of beer. She had previously consumed six beers in August during a domestic argument and left the home to sit in her car but did not drive. She was on an antidepressant for post partum depression and her husband was concerned. She went to see the psychiatrist and was asked about her alcohol consumption.
She informed the Tribunal that she had used a narcotic, Percocet, about three times a day between August and October 2013. This had been prescribed by her physician following the delivery of her daughter. She then began obtaining the drug illicitly because of the mood change it gave her. She stopped breastfeeding when using Percocet.
Questioned about her failure to complete the Substance Abuse Assessment form she stated that she misunderstood the Registrar’s request on January 21, 2014 to take the letter “when your condition improves”. She stated that she did not have a condition and was reminded by the Tribunal that a condition of alcohol dependence was reported by a physician on January 16, 2014 and that the physician stated that the patient was aware of the report.
ISSUES
Should the decision of the Registrar to suspend the Applicant’s licence be confirmed, modified or set aside?
In particular:
Is the Applicant addicted to the use of alcohol or a drug to an extent likely to significantly interfere with her ability to drive a motor vehicle of the applicable class 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.
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.
The Respondent relies on:
An unsolicited Medical Condition Report filed on January 16, 2014 by a physician in compliance with Section 203 of the Act reporting alcohol dependence.
Section 47(1)(g) of the Act authorised the Registrar to issue a suspension of the Applicant’s driving privilege.
Ontario Regulation 340/94 (14) authorised the Registrar to continue the suspension until the Applicant submits confirmation by her treating physician that she has remained abstinent from alcohol for a period of twelve months, has successfully completed an alcohol treatment program and is supportive of her driving privilege.
A Substance Abuse Assessment form has not been completed in spite of repeated requests by the ministry.
The Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (CCMTA), under section 15.6.3 applies to all drivers who are under the influence of alcohol and illicit drugs.
STANDARD: All drivers are eligible for a licence if:
Meets the criteria for remission and/or has abstained from the substance for 12 months
Earlier re-licencing may be considered upon favourable recommendation from an addictions specialist and/or treating physician recognised by the licensing authority and the successful completion of a drug rehabilitation program.
The functional abilities necessary for driving are not impaired.
The Applicant has acknowledged that she has made poor decisions and has admitted to the use of an illicit drug several months prior to the event that brought her to see a psychiatrist.
The onus is on the Applicant to provide medical support for reinstatement and to provide the ministry with the information requested on a Substance Abuse Assessment.
The Applicant acklowledged that she has not adhered to the Registrar’s requirements for reinstatement.
She stated that will take steps to meet those requirements.
APPLICATION OF THE LAW TO FACTS
The Tribunal finds that the Respondent was justified in issuing a suspension of driving privilege upon receipt of a Medical Condition Report of alcohol dependence by a physician in compliance with section 203 of the Act. The Tribunal notes that the psychiatrist who completed the Medical Condition Report did not include a diagnosis of emotional illness.
The Substance Abuse Assessment form requested by the Registrar has been ignored by the Applicant in spite of repeated requests.
The Tribunal notes that the laboratory reports submitted by the Applicant do not demonstrate ongoing alcohol abuse in October 2013 and February 2014.
The Registrar was justified in issuing a suspension of driving privilege under section 47(1) of the Act, and a continuation of the suspension under Ontario Regulation 340/94 (14) due to failure by the Applicant to provide the medical information for consideration of reinstatement,
The Tribunal finds that the onus is on the Applicant to provide the information requested by the Registrar and to prove that she does not suffer from any mental, emotional, nervous or physical condition or disability likely to significantly interfere with her ability to drive a motor vehicle of the applicable class safely
The Tribunal finds that there is no medical evidence in support of re-licensure.
DECISION
Upon the application by the Applicant to appeal the decision effective January 31, 2014 of the Registrar to suspend her 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, M.D., Member
Released: March 13, 2014