OLAT 2014

The applicant appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming refusing to remove two conditions from its liquor licence that prohibited music on the patio and propped doors.

The Tribunal found that a change in circumstances, including area revitalization and technological changes, justified removing the conditions.

Noting the applicant's responsible business history and the absence of the objectors at the hearing, the Tribunal directed the Registrar to remove the conditions and, on consent, added a new condition prohibiting amplified or live music on the patio after midnight.

The applicant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend his driver's licence due to opiate addiction.

The applicant had become addicted to opiates following a back surgery but was currently stabilized on Suboxone treatment.

His treating addiction specialist strongly recommended immediate reinstatement of his licence, stating he was safe to drive.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that, on a balance of probabilities, the applicant was not suffering from a condition likely to significantly interfere with his ability to operate a motor vehicle safely.

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

The Applicant brought a motion to extend the time to file an appeal against the revocation of his registration as a gaming assistant under the Gaming Control Act, 1992.

The Applicant had breached the terms of his registration by failing to report charges under the Highway Traffic Act.

Applying the four-factor test for extending time, the Tribunal found that while the Applicant had a bona fide intention to appeal and the delay was short, the Registrar would be prejudiced and the appeal lacked merit.

The motion for an extension of time was dismissed.

The Applicants appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar to refuse to register Platinum Auto Gallery Inc. and Behzad Rabie, and to revoke the registration of Jamie Giroux as motor vehicle salespersons.

The Tribunal found overwhelming evidence of poor business practices, including failing to disclose accident histories, selling unsafe vehicles, and bullying customers.

The Tribunal concluded that the Applicants' past conduct provided reasonable grounds to believe they would not carry on business with integrity and honesty, and directed the Registrar to carry out the Proposal.

The applicant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend his driver's licence following a medical report of a hypoglycemic episode resulting in a seizure.

The applicant argued the episode was caused by overexertion and that his diabetes was now stable.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal confirmed the Registrar's decision, finding the suspension justified pending the applicant providing the required medical confirmations of stability for the requisite period.

The applicant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her motor vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act, arguing the vehicle was stolen by her boyfriend and that the impoundment caused exceptional hardship.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the vehicle was not stolen, as the boyfriend had implied consent to use it.

The Tribunal also dismissed the exceptional hardship claim because the applicant had access to alternative transportation, including public transit and assistance from family.

The impoundment was confirmed.

The applicant appealed a decision of the Registrar of Motor Vehicles to suspend his driver's licence due to alcohol dependence.

The Ministry required a one-year period of abstinence for reinstatement.

The applicant argued he had been abstinent for two months and was participating in treatment programs.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that two physicians had diagnosed the applicant with alcohol dependence and concluded that he was addicted to alcohol to an extent likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely.

The Tribunal confirmed the Registrar's decision to suspend the licence.

The Applicant appealed a 90-day administrative driver's licence suspension imposed by the Registrar of Motor Vehicles for refusing to provide a breath sample.

The Applicant argued he was unable to comply with the demand due to a medical condition, specifically asthma, shortness of breath, and anxiety.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the police officer had reasonable grounds to make the demand and that the medical report provided by the Applicant failed to link his medical history to an inability to comply with the demand.

The appeal was dismissed and the suspension confirmed.

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

The vehicle was impounded after her son was caught driving it while his licence was suspended.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to exercise due diligence in checking her son's licence status.

Furthermore, the exceptional hardship claim failed because the applicant had alternative transportation available, as her employer provided a taxi and her daughter could drive her.

The appeal was dismissed and the impoundment confirmed.

The applicant's vehicle was impounded for 45 days after she was caught driving while disqualified.

She filed an appeal of the impoundment 8 days after the 15-day limitation period expired.

The applicant brought a motion to extend the time for filing the appeal, arguing she was unaware of the deadline.

Applying the four-part test for extensions of time, the Tribunal found the applicant had no bona fide intention to appeal within the time limit, the delay was significant given the 45-day impoundment period, and the appeal lacked merit as the applicant admitted to driving while disqualified.

The motion for an extension of time was denied and the impoundment was confirmed.

The Applicant appealed an order by the Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming immediately suspending her registration as a gaming assistant.

The suspension followed the Applicant's arrest on criminal charges related to a marijuana grow operation discovered at a property she owned.

The Tribunal found that the Applicant was aware of the illegal use of her property and had provided misleading information to investigators.

Concluding that the Applicant had not conducted herself within the law or with honesty and integrity, the Tribunal held that the immediate suspension of her registration was necessary in the public interest and confirmed the Registrar's order.

During a pre-hearing regarding the interim suspension and proposed revocation of a funeral home's licence, journalists from the Toronto Star brought a motion seeking access to the pre-hearing and related documents.

On consent, the Tribunal ordered the release of the pleadings to the media.

However, the Tribunal dismissed the motion to open the pre-hearing to the public, finding that doing so would inhibit settlement discussions and delay the expedited process required for an interim suspension case.

The Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming imposed a monetary penalty on the applicant licensee for allegedly permitting drunkenness and disorderly conduct by three patrons, contrary to s. 45(1) of Regulation 719/90 under the Liquor Licence Act.

On appeal, the Licence Appeal Tribunal found that while some patrons may have been intoxicated or acted disorderly, the Registrar failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the licensee knew or ought to have known of the drunkenness or disorderly conduct in the circumstances.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar to set aside the order of monetary penalty.

The applicant's vehicle was impounded under the Highway Traffic Act.

The applicant filed an appeal 8 days after the 15-day deadline and brought a motion for an extension of time.

The Tribunal applied the four-part test for granting an extension and found that the applicant had no bona fide intention to appeal within the time limit, the delay was significant given the 45-day impoundment period, and the appeal lacked merit.

The motion for an extension of time was denied and the impoundment was confirmed.

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

The parties reached a settlement and requested a Consent Order without a hearing.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal issued the Consent Order, incorporating the settlement terms, which included conditions that the applicant not be a partner, shareholder, officer, or director of a dealership, not provide financing, and provide full disclosure to the Registrar.

The applicants appealed a decision by Tarion Warranty Corporation disallowing several claims regarding alleged defects in their new home, including issues with support columns, basement height, insulation, air conditioner placement, duct debris, and a bathroom faucet.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal reviewed the claims under the Ontario New Home Warranties Plan Act.

The Tribunal dismissed all claims except for the bathroom faucet, finding that the other items either met the Building Code, were contractual issues outside its jurisdiction, or did not constitute a breach of warranty.