Appeals 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 to suspend a driver’s licence under subsection 47(1) of the Act.
Between:
Michael Hansford
Appellant
and
Registrar of Motor Vehicles
Respondent
DECISION AND ORDER
Adjudicator: Dr. Peter Savage, Member
Appearances:
For the Appellant: Michael Hansford, Self-Represented
For the Respondent: Kyle Beal, Agent for the Registrar
Heard by Teleconference: November 18, 2021
REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
A. OVERVIEW:
On October 23, 2021 the Registrar suspended the appellant’s class-G licence under s. 47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8 (the “HTA”) after receiving a report from a police officer that the appellant apparently suffered from a loss of consciousness due to hypoglycemia leading the officer to request a medical health assessment. The appellant appeals the suspension and asks the Tribunal to reinstate his licence.
On the question of the appellant’s medical condition of hypoglycemia, having considered all of the evidence and for the reasons that follow, the Tribunal sets aside the Registrar’s decision to suspend the appellant’s driver’s licence for medical reasons under s. 47(1) of the HTA.
B. ISSUES:
The issue in this appeal is whether the appellant suffers from a medical condition, specifically, hypoglycemia associated with type 1 diabetes, which is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a vehicle safely.
To answer that issue, I will address the following questions:
a. Does the appellant suffer from a medical condition?
b. If the appellant suffers from a medical condition, is it likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a vehicle safely?
C. LAW:
Under the HTA the Registrar is responsible for ensuring that drivers are medically fit to drive vehicles on the highway. In this case, the Registrar acted pursuant to s. 47(1) of the HTA and s. 14(1)(a) of the Regulation.
Under s.14(2)(b) of the Regulation, the Registrar may require a driver to provide satisfactory evidence that he or she is able to drive safely.
A person whose licence is suspended under these provisions may appeal the suspension to the Tribunal under s. 50(1) of the HTA.
On appeal, the Registrar has the burden of establishing, on a balance of probabilities, that the appellant’s ability to drive safely is likely to be significantly affected by a medical condition.
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
a. Does the appellant suffer from a medical condition?
The Registrar alleges that the appellant suffers from hypoglycemia related to his type one diabetes based on the police report of September 25, 2021, and subsequent reports from the appellant’s endocrinologist, Dr.Twum-Barima, as well as Dr. Fredrick Cheng the appellant’s family doctor.
The appellant testified he has a medical condition and identified it as type 1 diabetes. The appellant further testified he had a single episode of hypoglycemia on September 24, 2021.
The appellant testified the episode of hypoglycemia was due to the fact he had taken his rapid acting insulin 15 minutes prior to his dinner at a restaurant. The dinner was not as large as advertised and as such his regular dose of rapid acting insulin proved to be too large. He thought he could get home but started to feel light headed while driving and steered his car to the side of the road. This was the first bout of hypoglycemia the appellant had had in 40 years of type one diabetes.
The appellant testified that he immediately sought help in preventing further episodes both from his endocrinologist and his family doctor. The appellant pointed out that neither the emergency physician, endocrinologist or the family doctor told him to stop driving or reported his condition to the MTO.
The appellant’s testimony and the medical evidence presented at the hearing supports the conclusion that the appellant suffers from a medical condition and that he had a significant episode of hypoglycemia.
On a balance of probabilities, I find that the Registrar has established the appellant has a medical condition and had a single episode of hypoglycemia.
b. If the appellant suffers from a medical condition, is it likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a vehicle safely?
The Registrar has the burden of establishing that the appellant’s medical condition is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle safely. I find that the Registrar has not met that burden.
The Registrar drew the Tribunal’s attention to the CCMTA (Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators) standards and recommendations. The Registrar pointed out the dangers that hypoglycemia could cause while driving. The Registrar outlined the requirements that would be needed to consider licence reinstatement. This would include the condition being stable for 6 months however this period could be shortened if the appellant’s specialist indicated glycemic control had been established.
The Registrar made the following submissions with respect to how the appellant’s condition affects the appellant’s ability to drive safely:
- the appellant’s conditions are confirmed by a treating physician and the appellant himself
- The appellant has not completed a full 6 months of documented glycemic control.
- the Registrar argues that there was an episode of hypoglycemia even though the appellant is well educated in the management of his diabetes and is vigilant in his diabetic control. The Registrar argues that a full 6-month period of observation is required
- The Registrar maintains the appellant does not meet the standards recommended by the CCMTA for re-licencing.
The appellant maintains he is a safe driver, has a safe driving record and argues that there is no reason his diabetes would affect his driving safety. The appellant addressed the respondent’s concerns
The appellant testified he had been driving for many years and had no history of accidents and pointed to his spotless driving record from the Ministry of Transportation.
The appellant addressed the Registrar’s concerns about his hypoglycemia episode by detailing to the circumstances that led to the one event.
The appellant emphasised the point that none of the doctors he had consulted shortly after the episode of hypoglycemia told him to stop driving or reported him to the MTO.
The appellant addressed the Registrar’s concerns about future hypoglycemia by pointing out that he had obtained a Dexcom G-6 glucose monitoring system. This system continuously monitors the blood glucose and communicates the results to the appellant continuously. This system will give warning alarms very early if the blood sugar is trending low or heading even near the boundaries of hypoglycemia. The appellant included reports generated by this system in the last two weeks.
The appellant testified he understands his diabetes very well and he himself was very alarmed by the bout of hypoglycemia he suffered. He took it very seriously and immediately saw his endocrinologist and family doctor and has taken steps to prevent any recurrence of the hypoglycemia.
The appellant points out that his endocrinologist has stated that glycemic control has been re-established. The appellant also testifies he will continue to see his endocrinologist every four months as well as visiting his family doctor on a regular basis.
Based on the evidence before me, I am not satisfied on a balance of probabilities that the appellant’s medical condition is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a vehicle safely. A review of the evidence and the appellant’s submissions shows that while the appellant suffers from type one diabetes and had a single bout of hypoglycemia the condition has been stabilized and glycemic control has been established at this time and that, a longer period of stability is not needed. Moreover, I am persuaded by the appellant’s evidence—he has excellent insight into his medical condition and has taken appropriate steps since the single incident to avoid a reoccurrence.
E. ORDER:
- For the reasons set out above, pursuant to subsection 50(2) of the HTA, I set aside the Registrar’s decision to suspend the appellant’s driver’s licence for medical reasons.
LICENCE APPEAL TRIBUNAL
________________________
Dr. Peter Savage, Member
Released: November 25, 2021