Licence Appeal Tribunal

Safety, Licensing Appeals and Standards Tribunals Ontario

Tribunal d’appel en matière de permis Tribunaux de la sécurité, des appels en matière de permis et des normes Ontario

Date: 2020-06-03

Appeal under subsection 50(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H. 8, from a decision of the Minister of Transportation pursuant to section 47(1) of the Act to suspend a Driver’s Licence

Between:

Trevor Ellis Appellant

and

Registrar of Motor Vehicles Respondent

DECISION AND ORDER

Panel: Peter Savage, M.D., Member Avvy Yao-Yao Go, Member

Appearances:

For the Appellant: No-one appearing

For the Respondent: Sanjay Kapur, Agent

Place and date of hearing:

By teleconference: May 28, 2020

REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER:

A. Overview

1By a letter dated December 28, 2019, the Deputy Registrar of Motor Vehicles advised Trevor Ellis (“the appellant”) that his driving privilege was suspended as a result of a Medical Condition Report indicating that the appellant has a condition, namely seizure, that affects his ability to drive safely.

2The appellant appealed the suspension to the Licence Appeal Tribunal.

3For reasons that follow, we confirm the Registrar’s decision.

B. ISSUES:

4The issue in this appeal is whether the appellant suffers from a mental or physical disability likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle safely.

C. LAW:

5The Registrar has the power under s. 47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H. 8 (HTA) to suspend or cancel a driver’s licence on various grounds.

6Subsection 14(1) of O. Reg. 340/94 (Regulation) under the HTA states in part:

(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....

7Section 14(2)(a) of the Regulation allows the Minister of Transportation to consider the Canadian Council of Motor Transportation Administrators Medical Standards for Drivers (CCMTA Standards) when determining whether the requirements of s.14(1) are met. Similarly, the Tribunal may take the CCMTA Standards into consideration, although they are not binding documents.

8Under s. 14(2)(b) of the Regulation, the Minister may also require a driver to provide satisfactory evidence that he or she is able to drive safely. The Tribunal may consider whether a driver has complied with such a request.

9The Registrar has the burden of establishing the ground for suspending the licence on a balance of probabilities. Following a hearing, the Tribunal may, under s. 50(2) of the HTA, confirm, modify or set aside the decision or order of the Registrar.

D. EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS:

Does the appellant have a medical condition?

10The appellant did not attend the hearing. Efforts were made by the Tribunal both prior to the hearing and at the start of the hearing to contact the appellant to no avail. The Tribunal has also reached out to the appellant to ask for medical evidence but did not receive any from the appellant as of this date.

11The appellant’s driver licence was suspended after the Registrar received an unsolicited Medical Condition Report from an Internal Medicine Specialist who treated the appellant on December 23, 2019 and diagnosed him with seizure.

12The Registrar then wrote to the appellant and asked for a medical form to be completed. The appellant did not provide any medical form, nor provide any information from any medical practitioner to the Registrar.

13The appellant did not dispute that he has seizures. In his notice of appeal the appellant stated that he only has seizures while sleeping, and therefore the condition will not affect his ability to drive. Due to COVID-19, the appellant stated he was not able to provide medical reports from his physician.

14Based on the evidence before us, we find that the appellant does have a medical condition, namely seizure.

Whether the appellant’s medical condition is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely?

15We find that the appellant’s medical condition is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle safely.

16The only piece of medical evidence we have is the Medical Condition Report from the ER doctor who checked off “unknown” as the cause of seizure in the appellant’s case.

17The CCMTA Standards draw attention to the risks that uncontrolled seizures can present to the driver of a motor vehicle as it could interfere with a driver’s ability to drive safely. The CCMTA Standards therefore recommend that seizures must be controlled as a prerequisite to driving. The Standards also recommend that the driver be assessed after 12 months since the last occurrence of the seizure. The Standards do provide for an exception for those who only have seizures while they are asleep. However, without the benefit of the appellant’s testimony, and medical evidence from the appellant’s treating physician, we are unable to assess the validity of the appellant’s claim that he only suffers seizures while sleeping.

18While we are not bound by the CCMTA Standards, we find that it is reasonable to apply the Standards in this case given the paucity of medical evidence that would otherwise have allowed us to assess the nature of the seizures and how it may have affected the appellant’s ability to drive.

19While we are confirming the suspension for the time being, it remains open to the appellant, at any time, to provide relevant medical information from his treating physician to the Registrar, should he wish to have his licence be reinstated.

20The Registrar has asked us to impose, as a condition for the appellant to file a further appeal, or to re-open his appeal, the requirement that the appellant complete the medical form as requested by the Registrar. We decline to impose such a condition as being unnecessary, nor do we consider we have the jurisdiction to restrict the appellant’s ability to exercise his right to appeal granted under s.50 of the HTA. If the appellant does decide to file another appeal, it will be in his best interests to do so with the relevant medical evidence.

E. OrdER:

21We confirm the decision by the Registrar to suspend the appellant’s driving privilege under section 47(1) of the HTA.