OLAT 2018

The appellants appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar to refuse their applications for registration as a motor vehicle dealer and salesperson.

The Tribunal found that while the appellants could reasonably be expected to be financially responsible, Mr. Chambers knowingly made false statements on his application regarding his suspended driver's licence, outstanding fines, and past convictions.

Furthermore, his extensive history of Highway Traffic Act convictions, including driving while suspended, afforded reasonable grounds for belief that the business would not be carried on in accordance with the law and with integrity and honesty.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar to carry out the proposal to refuse the applications.

The appellant appealed the Minister of Transportation's decision to downgrade his commercial Class 'A' driver's licence to a Class 'G' licence following a seizure and subsequent diagnosis of epilepsy.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the appellant's medical condition significantly interfered with his ability to safely operate a commercial vehicle.

Applying the higher medical standards required for commercial drivers, the Tribunal confirmed the Minister's decision to change the licence class.

The Registrar of Alcohol, Gaming and Racing issued a Notice of Proposal to revoke the liquor licences of two restaurants owned by the appellant, alleging breaches of licence conditions restricting her son's involvement in the businesses and the provision of false information on applications.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the appellant breached a condition on each licence by allowing her son to be involved in management and by his failure to report criminal charges.

However, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant did not knowingly provide false information on her applications and that her conduct did not afford reasonable grounds for belief that she would not carry on business in accordance with the law and with integrity and honesty.

The parties were directed to make written submissions on the appropriate sanction.

The Registrar of Alcohol, Gaming and Racing ordered a $6,000 monetary penalty against the appellant establishment for allegedly serving alcohol to three minors.

The appellant appealed the order.

The Tribunal found that the Registrar's case relied entirely on uncorroborated hearsay evidence from inspectors who spoke to the minors, who had demonstrably lied about their identification and contact information.

Preferring the direct testimony of the server who denied serving the minors, the Tribunal concluded there was insufficient evidence that alcohol was sold, served, or consumed by the minors.

The monetary penalty was set aside.

The appellant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend her driver's licence after a physician reported her as alcohol dependent following an emergency room visit for anxiety.

The appellant subsequently completed a residential addiction treatment program and maintained abstinence.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that while the appellant had a past pattern of alcohol dependence, her successful treatment, follow-up plan, and support network indicated her current condition did not impair her ability to drive safely.

The Tribunal set aside the licence suspension.

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her vehicle, which was seized after her ex-boyfriend was caught driving it with a suspended licence.

She argued the vehicle was stolen and that the impoundment caused her exceptional hardship.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant had given her ex-boyfriend permission to use the vehicle and left him with a spare key.

Furthermore, the Tribunal found no exceptional hardship, as the appellant had access to reasonable alternative transportation, including public transit, cabs, and family members' vehicles.

The Registrar of Alcohol, Gaming and Racing issued an Order of Monetary Penalty of $3,000 against the appellant, alleging it permitted drinking games that encouraged immoderate consumption of liquor and failed to maintain control over the premises.

The allegations stemmed from patrons playing dice games.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the dice games were culturally significant and not intended to promote drinking, and there was no evidence of intoxication or a policy encouraging immoderate consumption.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar not to carry out the monetary penalty.

The respondent Registrar brought a motion to change the venue of a revocation hearing from Toronto to Ottawa to minimize inconvenience to eight consumer witnesses.

The appellants opposed the motion, arguing that the change would cause financial hardship due to their Toronto-based counsel's travel expenses.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal granted the motion, finding that the inconvenience to the eight consumer witnesses should be minimized by holding the hearing in Ottawa.

To mitigate the financial impact on the appellants, the Tribunal adjourned the hearing to allow them time to save for the unexpected travel expenses.

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of his motor vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act, arguing it caused exceptional hardship.

The vehicle was impounded after the appellant allowed an acquaintance to drive it, who was subsequently stopped for impaired driving.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant had access to alternative transportation through family, friends, and public transit, and therefore failed to meet the regulatory criteria for exceptional hardship.

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her motor vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act.

The vehicle was impounded after police stopped it and found it was being driven by a suspended driver.

The appellant had loaned the vehicle to her son, who was in the passenger seat at the time of the stop, but she did not know the driver and had not given him permission to drive.

The Tribunal found there was insufficient evidence to establish the due diligence defence under s. 50.2(3)(c) of the Act, as the appellant provided no evidence regarding how the suspended driver came to be driving or what efforts her son made to verify the driver's licence status.

The appeal was dismissed and the impoundment confirmed.

The appellant appealed a Notice of Proposal to suspend its liquor licence for 30 days.

The appellant failed to appear at the scheduled hearing, despite a previous adjournment granted due to its counsel's scheduling error.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the appeal should be treated as abandoned and issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss, giving the appellant 10 days to provide written submissions explaining its failure to attend.

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of his vehicle for driving while suspended, arguing it would cause exceptional hardship because he needed it for work.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant's employer had rented a vehicle for him to use, meaning he had an alternative to the impounded vehicle.

As an alternative was available, the Tribunal could not consider financial or economic loss, and the impoundment was confirmed.

The appellant appealed a Notice of Proposed Order to Revoke Registration as a gaming supplier in the class of Seller.

The Deputy Registrar alleged the appellant allowed illegal gambling on his convenience store premises using electronic tablet devices.

The Tribunal found that the appellant permitted an illegal lottery scheme to operate on his premises and failed to remove the devices after being warned by inspectors.

Concluding that the appellant's past conduct provided reason to believe he would not act in accordance with the law, integrity, honesty, or the public interest, the Tribunal confirmed the proposal to revoke his registration.

The appellant requested to bring a motion for costs following the conclusion of the hearing on the merits.

The Tribunal issued an order setting the timetable for the parties to serve and file their written submissions, evidence, and case law regarding the costs motion.

The appellant's vehicle was impounded for 45 days after her boyfriend drove it while his licence was suspended for a Criminal Code conviction.

The appellant filed an appeal within the 15-day period but her payment via pre-paid credit card was rejected.

She paid by money order shortly after the deadline.

The appellant brought a motion to extend the time to file the appeal.

The Tribunal applied the four-factor test from Manuel v. Registrar and found that the appellant had a bona fide intention to appeal, the delay was short and not her fault, and she had a reasonable chance of success on the merits.

The motion to extend time was granted and the appeal was ordered to proceed directly to an expedited hearing.

The appellant appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar to refuse his registration as a motor vehicle salesperson due to outstanding criminal charges and a warrant in Alberta.

Following a Divisional Court decision remitting the matter for a new hearing, the Tribunal heard evidence that the appellant had scheduled a trial for the outstanding charges.

The Tribunal adjourned the appeal and ordered the parties to provide submissions regarding the trial outcomes before rendering a final decision on the registration.

The appellant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend his driver's licence due to cognitive impairment and dementia.

The appellant had failed a functional driving assessment and refused to undergo another one.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal confirmed the suspension, finding that the appellant suffers from a medical condition that significantly interferes with his ability to operate a motor vehicle safely.

The applicant licensee applied under s. 14(2) of the Liquor Licence Act to remove a condition on its liquor licence prohibiting the operation of a nightclub and live amplified music.

The applicant argued that the Registrar no longer enforced such conditions and that the neighbourhood's culture had changed.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found insufficient evidence of a change in circumstances, noting recent enforcement actions and community complaints.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar to issue a Notice of Proposal to refuse to remove the condition, allowing the matter to proceed to a full hearing if appealed.

The appellant appealed the Director's proposal to refuse his application for a motor vehicle inspection station (MVIS) licence and registration as a motor vehicle inspection mechanic.

The appellant's previous licence and registration were revoked in 2015 due to issuing improper safety certificates, which the Tribunal had found was due to a lack of knowledge rather than dishonesty.

The Tribunal found that the appellant had since taken adequate steps to educate himself on the new regulations and rust-related safety issues.

The Tribunal concluded that the Director did not have reasonable grounds to believe the appellant would not act in accordance with the law, honesty, integrity, and competence, and ordered the Director to refrain from carrying out the proposal.

The applicant applied to remove conditions from its liquor licence, which restricted live entertainment and patio operating hours.

The conditions were originally imposed due to noise concerns from nearby residential units.

The applicant argued that a change in ownership and business model, along with new sound equipment, constituted a change in circumstances.

The Tribunal found insufficient evidence to establish a change in circumstances, noting that the proximity to residential units remained unchanged and the applicant provided no supporting evidence of neighbour support or bylaw compliance.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar to issue a Notice of Proposal to Refuse to Remove Conditions.