I.N. v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles, 2019 CanLII 32256

Date: 2019-03-04

Appeal under subsection 50(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.H.8, from a decision of the Registrar of Motor Vehicles to suspend a driver’s licence under section 47(1) of the Act

Between:

I.N.

Appellant

and

Registrar of Motor Vehicles

Respondent

DECISION AND ORDER

Panel: Dimitri Louvish, M.D., Member Harriet Lewis, Member

Appearances:

For the Appellant: I.N., Self-Represented For the Respondent: Stephen Grootenboer, Agent

Heard by Teleconference on: February 27, 2019

REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER

OVERVIEW

1The appellant, I.N., appeals from a decision made by the Registrar, Motor Vehicles (the “Registrar”) on October 29, 2018, to suspend his driving privileges pursuant to Section 47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, (the “Act”). The suspension arises as a result of a report by I.N.’s then family physician, Dr. T.M., indicating that I.N. suffers from Alcohol Use Disorder. On the basis of this diagnosis, the Registrar has determined that I.N. has a condition which affects his ability to operate a motor vehicle safely.

2The letter notifying I.N. of the suspension of his driving privileges states that the lifting of the suspension will depend on confirmation of I.N.’s abstinence for a period of one year, which period “may be reduced if your physician confirms that you have successfully completed an alcohol treatment program and is supportive of your driving privilege.”

3I.N. completed a residential treatment program at the Bellwood treatment centre on December 4, 2018 and has been continuing with treatment, supervision and an anti-craving medication. As a result, on December 27, 2018 the Deputy Registrar of Motor Vehicles wrote to I.N. advising him that as a result of reports filed on his behalf, although his driving privileges would remain under suspension, the period of confirmed abstinence was being reduced to a period of six months and the assessment “must be supported with the results of bio-chemical markers (MCV, GGT) with a clinical explanation of any results that are outside the normal laboratory range and drug toxicology (if applicable)”.

4On January 19, 2019, I.N. filed a Notice of Appeal of the Registrar’s decision .He submits that although six months of sobriety have not yet passed, he has completed all of the other medical requirements for reinstatement of his licence. He requires his licence to carry on his professional obligations and discharge his financial obligations.

5For the reasons which follow, we set aside the decision of the Registrar and reinstate I.N.’s driver’s licence.

ISSUES

6The issues are as follows:

i. Does I.N. suffer from a medical condition?

ii. Is I.N.’s medical condition, if any, likely to significantly affect his ability to operate a motor vehicle safely?

EVIDENCE

7The Registrar’s agent presented a series of medical assessments and letters attesting to I.N.’s medical condition and treatment since the suspension. The last of these was a letter from the Deputy Registrar dated February 25, 2019, just two days prior to this hearing. That letter confirms the suspension and the requirement of confirmation of abstinence from alcohol for a period of six months, as well as the provision of I.N.’s then current evidence of normal biochemical markers.

8I.N. provided his testimony in a forthright and open manner. He is a 60 year old man who has had a long and successful career in the commercial real estate business. For many years he was employed as a real estate executive. Unfortunately, the relationship with his boss deteriorated badly and I.N. felt harassed and abused. As a result, the relationship came to an end. The experience caused I.N. severe anxiety which he identifies as a cause of his increasing consumption of alcohol and his withdrawal from his family life.

9I.N. also suffers from a chronic medical condition which requires him to take medication that does not go well with alcohol.

10I.N. says that he had his last drink of alcohol on October 18, 2018. A few days later, he sought help from Dr. T.M., which resulted in the assessment that he had an alcohol use disorder and in the licence suspension now under appeal. He estimates that at that time he was drinking three or four glasses of wine, alone, each evening after dinner. He says he did not drive after drinking.

11I.N. spoke of the ultimatum given to him by his wife of 33 years who has indicated that she will end the marriage if he does not stop drinking. This causes him significant stress. His three adult children are also angry with him, and see his drinking as detrimental to their family life. He expressed his strong intention to remain abstinent for the sake of saving his marriage and relationships with his children. I.N. noted that he has lost weight since quitting drinking and that he maintains a daily one hour fitness regime.

12Notwithstanding his loss of earlier employment and his use of alcohol, I.N. has remained active in the commercial real estate business in Canada and internationally. While he has managed to carry on his work without being able to drive, he expects to soon be engaged in an international project that will be very difficult to complete without being able to rent a motor vehicle in a foreign country.

13I.N. provided evidence in the form of a letter from W.C., a clinical psychologist at Bellwood, confirming the progress of his treatment including his completion of a one month in-patient addiction program and consistent participation in an aftercare of weekly individual and group sessions. In her view, I.N. has “a strong commitment to alcohol abstinence” and “appears to have insight into the risks of returning to any form of alcohol use”. It is her opinion that I.N. is at “low risk for driving while under the influence of alcohol”.

13I.N. began the use of the anti-craving drug Naltrexone at Bellwood and has been taking 50 mg daily. He reports no cravings or interest in drinking, although there is alcohol in his home. A February 13, 2019 letter from Dr. S.B. reports that I.N.’s liver function and blood tests are within normal limits.

LAW AND ANALYSIS

14Section 14 of Ontario Regulation 340/94 states that 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.

15The Registrar relies on the initial Medical Condition Report which indicates an “alcohol use disorder” as well as on the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (“CCMTA”) Medical Standards for Drivers. Specifically he relies on section 15.6.3 which applies to drivers under the influence of alcohol. That standard recommends abstinence for twelve months, but re-licensing earlier upon favourable recommendations from an addictions specialist and/or a treating physician and the successful completion of a drug rehabilitation program.

16Although this Tribunal is not obliged to follow the CCMTA standard, we find that the favourable recommendations which would allow earlier re-licensing are present in this case. I.N. has successfully completed a rehabilitation program and is engaged in regular and frequent follow-up. He has met the requirement set for his chemical markers, and has presented in evidence, correspondence from both a physician and a psychologist/addictions specialist providing favourable recommendations for his re-licensing.

17At the date of the hearing of this matter, I.N. had been abstinent for four and a half months and is clearly motivated to continue on this course. It is our view that there is no objective medical grounds for the delay of the reinstatement of his driver’s licence nor any evidence that he is now unlikely to operate a motor vehicle safely.

CONCLUSION

18Although the Registrar holds to the six month period of abstinence, we do not agree that on the balance of probabilities, the appellant currently suffers from a condition likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle safely and therefore that there is any medical reason to delay the restoration of his licence.

ORDER

19For the reasons set out above, pursuant to subsection 50(2) of the Act, we set aside the decision of the Registrar and order the reinstatement of the appellant’s driver’s licence.