E. T. v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles, 2021 CanLII 20949

Date: 2021-03-11

An 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 licence pursuant to Section 47(1) of the Act.

Between:

E. T.

Appellant

-and-

Registrar of Motor Vehicles

Respondent

DECISION & ORDER

ADJUDICATORS:

Erica Weinberg, M.D., Member

Raymond C. Ramdayal, Member

APPEARANCES:

For the Appellant:

E. T. (self-represented)

For the Respondent:

Sonia De Santis, Agent

Heard by teleconference:

January 27, 2021

Overview

1E. T. (the "appellant") appeals the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' (the "respondent") decision to suspend her driver's licence under s.47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8 for medical reasons.

Confidentiality Order

2As a preliminary matter, the appellant requested a confidentiality order to restrict access to the Tribunal's file in this matter, and also an order excluding members of the public from the virtual hearing room.

3Tribunal Ontario's Access and Privacy Policy was discussed, including that the Tribunal may limit public access to all or part of a document to protect the confidentiality of personal or sensitive information.

4The panel received submissions from both parties. The appellant requested an order be made to preserve her anonymity given the sensitive nature of the medical information. The respondent took no position with respect to the appellant's request and consented to the Tribunal granting a confidentiality order.

5It is a fundamental principle of the Canadian legal system that hearings are presumptively open to the public. This means that members of the public are presumptively permitted to attend tribunal hearings, and are also presumptively permitted access to a tribunal's adjudicative records regarding a particular proceeding. This has been codified in the Tribunal Adjudicative Records Act, 2019, S.O. 2019, c. 7, Sched. 60 ("TARA") and the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.22 ("SPPA").

6Both the SPPA and TARA allow a Tribunal to restrict access to its hearings or its adjudicative records. Both statutes require a tribunal to balance the desirability of having its proceedings open to the public against the interest that the proposed confidentiality order is meant to protect. Under both statutes, the fact that "intimate or personal matters" may be disclosed constitute a ground upon which a party may ask for a confidentiality order.

7The Tribunal was satisfied that the sensitive nature of the medical information and the appellant's personal concerns, outweigh the interest of public disclosure, and a confidentiality order was granted. As such, the Tribunal's decision will refer to the appellant by her initials only.

8Further to our order, the hearing was restricted to include only the appellant, respondent and court reporter. The teleconference line was locked at the onset of the hearing.

Preliminary Issue

9During the hearing, the respondent was able to retrieve documents submitted by the appellant's new physician. Upon examination, the respondent confirmed that these documents had in fact been reviewed by their Medical Review team. The Tribunal was then verbally informed that that the appellant's driver's licence had been reinstated.

10Following the hearing, the respondent submitted a letter dated August 28, 2020, which confirmed that the appellant's medical report had been approved. The panel is unclear as to why this document was not provided earlier. Nonetheless, we are convinced that the medical suspension has been cancelled and the appellant's driver's licence has been reinstated, this rendering this appeal moot.

11The appellant confirmed at the hearing that she no longer wanted to proceed with the appeal.

12In light of the recent developments, including the appellant's stated desire to not proceed with her appeal, the Tribunal's file will be closed.