Licence Appeal Tribunal
Tribunal d'appel en matière de permis
FILE: 9886/MED
CASE NAME: 9886 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
9886 Appellant
-and-
Registrar of Motor Vehicles Respondent
REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
ADJUDICATOR: Kevin Flynn, M.D., Member
APPEARANCES:
For the Appellant: Self-represented
For the Respondent: Kyle M. Biel, Agent
Heard in Toronto: December 16, 2015 and February 16, 2016
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”).
OVERVIEW
The Appellant appeals the suspension of his driving privilege by the Registrar of Motor Vehicles effective August 27, 2015. The suspension followed a medical report of alcohol and drug dependence and a psychiatric condition. The grounds for his appeal is that he has remained abstinent from alcohol for six months and that he has been attending his family physician for drug and alcohol monitoring regularly.
The Tribunal finds that he has not submitted medical evidence in support of reinstatement of his driving privilege and confirmation of abstinence from alcohol for a period of six months.
The Tribunal confirms the suspension.
FACTS
The Registrar received a letter from a psychiatrist, Dr. Y., dated July 12, 2015, pursuant to section 203 of the Act, reporting alcohol and drug dependence and an unstable mental or emotional condition.
The Registrar informed the Appellant on August 18, 2015, that his driving privilege was suspended under section 47(1) of the Act.
In order to be considered for reinstatement he was requested to take the letter of suspension to his treating physician when his condition improves and to submit confirmation of abstinence from illicit drugs and alcohol for a period of twelve months.
The appellant was advised that the period of suspension may be reduced if the physician confirms that the Appellant has successfully completed an alcohol treatment program and a drug treatment program and is supportive of reinstatement.
At the commencement of the hearing on December 16, 2015, the Appellant informed the Tribunal that notice to the Registrar by Dr. Y. followed police action at his residence during investigation of illicit drug use. He was taken by police to the local emergency room where he was seen by Dr. Y.
He informed the Tribunal that since the suspension he has attended his family physician, Dr. I., for about four months for drug monitoring. Because the physician was not able to confirm the six month period of abstinence required by the Registrar, she was unable to submit the required report.
The Tribunal adjourned the hearing until February 17, 2016, in order to allow the Appellant to submit the required medical documentation.
Mr. Biel, Agent for the Registrar, informed the Appellant that the Registrar would review the medical report and that if the information met the Registrar’s requirements and if the physician supported reinstatement, his licence would be renewed.
On February 17, 2016, the hearing resumed. The Appellant informed the Tribunal that on January 27, 2016, laboratory evidence showed normal biochemical markers (GGT, MCV, ALT, AST) indicating control in his use of alcohol. He stated that he has been seeing Dr. I. monthly for urine tests and that he thought that the tests were normal and he seemed to think that these tests would also show abstinence from alcohol. The Tribunal told the Appellant that urine tests for drug use do not include alcohol.
Mr. Biel informed the Appellant that the Registrar required written confirmation from his physician that he has been abstinent from alcohol for a period of six months and support for reinstatement. There was no longer a requirement for confirmation of abstinence from illicit drugs.
The Appellant submitted a number of letters of support, and of his participation in sweat lodge ceremonies, and in volunteering and of confirmation of his continued enrolment in a three year Civil Engineering Program.
ISSUES
Should the decision of the Registrar to suspend the Appellant’s licence be confirmed, modified or set aside?
Is the Appellant addicted to the use of alcohol to an extent 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
Mr. Biel in submissions stated:
The Registrar was justified under section 47(1) of the Act in suspending the Appellant’s driving privilege upon receipt of a medical report pursuant to section 203 of the Act, of alcohol and drug dependence and emotional instability.
The Registrar requires medical confirmation under Ontario Regulation 340/94 (14)(1)(b) that the Appellant is not addicted to the use of alcohol to an extent likely to significantly interfere with his or her ability to drive a motor vehicle safely.
The Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators, (CCMTA), under section 15.6.3 recommends a period of abstinence from alcohol of twelve months. This period would be reduced to six months if the Appellant’s physician confirms that he has been abstinent from alcohol for a period of six months and is supportive of reinstatement.
The Appellant has stated that he has been attending non-medical support counselling, which indicates that he is motivated to change his life style.
The Appellant is strongly advised to approach his physician with a request for a letter that confirms his abstinence from alcohol for a period of six months and a recommendation for reinstatement.
The Appellant, in submissions, agreed with the recommendation that he contact his family physician with a request for a letter of confirmation that he has remained abstinent form alcohol for a period of six months together with a recommendation for reinstatement of his driving privilege.
Weighing the evidence on a balance of probabilities, the Tribunal finds that the Appellant suffers from a condition which is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to operate a motor vehicle safely.
Notwithstanding this finding, the Tribunal impresses on the Appellant that the onus is on him to submit confirmation by his attending physician of abstinence from the use of alcohol for a period of six month with a recommendation by his physician for reinstatement of his driving privilege.
DECISION
Upon the application by the Appellant to appeal the decision effective August 27, 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
_________________________
Kevin Flynn, M.D., Member
Released: February 23, 2016