Licence Appeal Tribunal
Appeal d'appel en matière de permis
FILE: 9359/MED
CASE NAME: 9359 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
9359 Appellant
-and-
Registrar of Motor Vehicles Respondent
REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
ADJUDICATOR: Garry Fisher, M.D., Member
APPEARANCES:
For the Appellant: Self-represented
For the Respondent: Kyle Biel, Agent
Heard by teleconference: March 5 2015
DECISION AND REASONS
This is an appeal to the Licence Appeal Tribunal (the "Tribunal") by the Appellant 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 Appellant's driver's licence was suspended January 22, 2015, based on a Medical Condition Report from Dr A.H, a neurologist, dated January 16 2015. This report was filed as per the requirements of section 203 of the Act. The condition reported was "seizure(s) – cerebral"
In the report, Dr. A.H.stated "7-8 months, simple partial seizures (localization related symptomatic epilepsy), no loss of awareness or amnesia of the events, only 10-15 second speech impairment. Temporal cavernoma."
The Tribunal has no other evidence before it regarding the medical basis for the licence suspension. The Appellant's family doctor was apparently involved and referred the Appellant to Dr A.H. and arranged for the MRI that diagnosed the temporal lobe lesion. None of this medical work-up was provided to clarify the seizure etiology.
A standardized "Epilepsy and Seizures Form" was mailed to the Appellant. It was not completed.
The Respondent's Agent referred the Tribunal to the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators ("CCMTA") medical standards, in particular at page 250 which addresses the issue of epilepsy with simple partial seizures for non-commercial drivers. It sets out the information required from the doctor in order for licensing eligibility, such as whether the symptoms have been consistent for at least one year, details of the treatment regime and whether the driver is compliant with the regime. This would include a favourable assessment from the treating physician.
The Appellant testified that Dr A.H. prescribed an anti-epileptic medication but left it up to the Appellant as to whether he would use the drug. The Tribunal has no supporting documentation from the Appellant's neurologist. The Appellant provided no information from his family doctor. The request to the Appellant for information from the Appellant's treating physicians, based on the need to satisfy requirements of the CCMTA was ignored.
ISSUES
Should the decision of the Registrar to suspend the Appellant's licence be confirmed, modified or set aside?
In particular:
Does the Appellant suffer from a physical disability likely to significantly interfere with his 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.
Section 47(1) of the Act gives the Registrar the power to suspend or cancel a driver's licence on the ground(s) set out in section 14 (1) of the Regulation set out above.
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
While the Tribunal is not bound by the CCMTA guidelines, there generally should be a good reason for departing from these guidelines. The criteria in this case of seizures is clear.
The Tribunal must make its decision based on the evidence put before it. The Appellant put forward minimal evidence and very little supportive evidence in his favour. What the Tribunal has before it is the very recent (January 16, 2015) report of the neurologist which suggests that the physical condition may make it dangerous for the Appellant to drive. In the absence of any other evidence, the Tribunal finds, in this instance, that there is no reason to depart from the CCMTA guideline.
Weighing the evidence on a balance of probabilities, the Tribunal finds the Appellant is suffering from a condition which is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to operate a motor vehicle safely.
DECISION
Upon the application by the Appellant to appeal the decision effective January 22 2015 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 Appellant;
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
Garry Fisher M.D., Member
Released: March 17, 2015