OLAT 2019

The appellant appealed a Cancellation and Seizure Order issued by the Registrar of Motor Vehicles, which terminated its right to operate commercial trucks in Ontario due to a poor safety record.

The appellant's violation rate exceeded 100%, and it had failed a facility audit, accumulated numerous convictions, and been involved in multiple collisions.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the appellant's proposed action plan, which included downsizing to one truck, failed to adequately address the safety concerns.

The Tribunal concluded there were reasonable grounds to believe the appellant would not operate safely and confirmed the cancellation order.

The appellant's vehicle was impounded after his brother was caught driving it while his licence was suspended.

The appellant filed an appeal and a motion to extend the time to appeal 43 days after the impoundment, well past the 15-day statutory deadline.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the motion for an extension of time, finding no bona fide intention to appeal within the time limit, significant delay, and weak merits regarding the appellant's claims of due diligence and exceptional hardship.

The appellant appealed the Registrar's proposal to refuse his registration as a motor vehicle salesperson under the Motor Vehicle Dealers Act, 2002.

The parties reached an agreement and consented to waive the hearing.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal ordered that the appellant's registration be issued subject to several conditions, including restrictions on trading without registration, transferring registration, and acting as a controlling mind of a dealer.

The appellants appealed a decision by Tarion Warranty Corporation denying a warranty claim for kitchen defects in their new home.

Tarion brought a motion to add the builder, Country Wide Homes, as a party to the appeal, arguing the builder had a significant financial and reputational interest.

The homeowners consented to the motion.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the motion, finding that Tarion failed to establish the builder's significant interest, particularly noting that the builder took no steps to participate in the motion or establish its right to be added.

The appellant appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar to revoke its registration as a travel agent and travel wholesaler under the Travel Industry Act, 2002.

At a case conference, the parties resolved the issues and consented to the appellant's continued registration subject to strict conditions, including financial reporting, maintaining minimum working capital, and trust account compliance.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal issued a Consent Order incorporating the Minutes of Settlement and disposing of the matter without a hearing.

The appellant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend his driver's licence under section 47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act due to alcohol dependence.

The suspension was triggered by a medical report from a physician who treated the appellant after a fall.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the appellant's testimony unreliable and preferred the medical evidence confirming a diagnosis of alcohol dependence.

Applying the CCMTA Medical Standards for Drivers, the Tribunal concluded the appellant's condition was likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely, as he had not abstained from alcohol for 12 months or completed a rehabilitation program.

The licence suspension was confirmed.

The appellant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend his driver's licence under s. 47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act due to heart disease with pre-syncope/syncope/arrhythmia.

The appellant experienced a cardiac arrest and defibrillator shock while driving, causing his wife to take control of the vehicle.

He experienced a second shock a few months later.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the appellant's medical condition was likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely, noting that six months had not passed since his last ICD event as required by the CCMTA Medical Standards for Drivers.

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

The appellant appealed a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar to refuse his registration as a motor vehicle salesperson under the Motor Vehicle Dealers Act, 2002.

The parties reached a resolution and requested a consent order.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal ordered the Registrar to register the appellant subject to several conditions, including disclosure requirements and restrictions on acting as a dealer, manager, or final signatory for specified periods.

The appellant brought a motion to exclude the testimony of two witnesses who were former employees of a financing company that had previously settled a civil suit with the appellant.

The appellant argued that a confidentiality provision in the settlement's Full and Final Mutual Release prohibited the witnesses from testifying about their past interactions.

The Tribunal found that the language of the Release did not prohibit testimony regarding the underlying interactions, but only restricted discussion of the settlement terms and the Release itself.

The Tribunal also held that the age of the evidence went to its weight rather than its admissibility.

The motion to exclude the witnesses was dismissed, subject to limitations on testifying about resolution discussions.

The appellant appealed the Registrar's proposal to refuse his registrations as a motor vehicle salesperson and dealer.

In a previous decision, the Tribunal ordered the appellant to produce requested documents or withdraw his appeal.

The appellant failed to comply and reaffirmed his intention not to disclose the documents.

The Registrar brought a motion for a final order.

The Tribunal granted the motion and directed the Registrar to carry out the proposal to deny the registrations.

The appellant appealed a Notice of Proposal to revoke his registration as a motor vehicle salesperson.

He requested an adjournment of the hearing pending the resolution of related criminal charges at the Superior Court of Justice.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal granted a short adjournment on consent to allow for settlement discussions, but declined to defer the hearing until after the criminal trial, noting the issues before the Tribunal were distinct from the criminal proceedings.

The appellant's driver's licence was suspended for medical reasons.

He appealed the suspension but subsequently provided updated medical information, leading the Registrar to lift the suspension and the Tribunal to close the file.

Nine months later, the appellant attempted to revive the appeal after learning he was required to submit further medical reports.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that it had been abandoned and that the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to prevent the Minister from requiring ongoing medical information from a licence holder.

The appellant appealed the Minister of Transportation's decision to downgrade his commercial Class AZ driver's licence to a Class G licence due to a cardiovascular condition.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the appellant's multiple cardiac abnormalities, including heart failure and atrial fibrillation, posed a significant risk of sudden incapacitation.

The Tribunal confirmed the Minister's decision, concluding that the appellant's cardiovascular condition was likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a commercial motor vehicle safely.

The appellant child care centre appealed the Director's decision to downgrade its licence to a provisional licence under the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014.

The downgrade followed the appellant's failure to comply with a Public Health work order requiring repairs to the kitchen area.

The appellant argued the Director lacked authority to issue the provisional licence and that the downgrade negatively impacted its ability to secure municipal funding for the repairs.

The Tribunal found that the Director was properly authorized, that the failure to comply with the work order constituted sufficient grounds for the downgrade, and that the availability of municipal funding was irrelevant to the Director's decision.

The appeal was dismissed and the provisional licence was continued.

The Registrar proposed to refuse the appellant's registration as a real estate salesperson based on an outstanding fine, past criminal convictions, and alleged false statements on his application.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the appellant had paid the fine and demonstrated financial responsibility.

The Tribunal also found that the appellant's past criminal conduct was dated, and he had since shown significant rehabilitation and success in business.

Finally, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant did not knowingly make false statements on his application, as he provided fulsome disclosure.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar not to carry out the proposal and found the appellant entitled to registration.

The appellant appealed a 7-day Suspension and Seizure Order issued by the Registrar of Motor Vehicles regarding its Commercial Vehicle Operator's Registration (CVOR).

The Registrar issued the order due to the appellant's chronically poor safety record and failure to abide by previously imposed conditions.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that despite recent improvements and the hiring of a safety consultant, the appellant's prolonged history of poor safety performance provided reasonable grounds to believe it would not operate safely.

The Tribunal confirmed the 7-day suspension.

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act, arguing it caused exceptional hardship due to financial strain.

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

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant owned and drove another vehicle during the impoundment period.

Because she had an alternative to the impounded vehicle, she failed to meet the threshold requirement for exceptional hardship under O. Reg. 631/98, and the Tribunal could not consider her financial losses.

The appellant appealed the 45-day impoundment of her motor vehicle under the Highway Traffic Act after her friend drove it with a suspended licence.

She argued the impoundment caused exceptional hardship due to the financial burden of impoundment fees.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal and confirmed the impoundment, finding that because the appellant had access to alternative transportation during the impoundment period, she could not meet the statutory requirement for exceptional hardship.

The appellant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend his driver's licence due to alcohol dependence and an alcohol-related seizure.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the medical evidence, including reports from the appellant's family physician and an internal medicine specialist, established that the appellant suffered from alcohol dependence.

Applying the CCMTA Medical Standards for Drivers, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant's condition was likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely, as there was no medical evidence of sustained abstinence or successful completion of a rehabilitation program.

The appeal was dismissed and the licence suspension was confirmed.

The appellant's vehicle was impounded after his son was caught driving it with a suspended licence.

The appellant filed an appeal past the 15-day deadline and brought a motion for an extension of time.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal applied the four-part test from Manuel v. Registrar and found that the appellant had a bona fide intention to appeal, was misinformed about the process, and faced exceptional hardship due to a recent cancer diagnosis requiring daily hospital visits.

The Tribunal granted the motion for an extension of time.