Licence Appeal Tribunal
Appeal from the Notice of Proposal of the Registrar, Alcohol Cannabis and Gaming Regulation and Public Protection Act, 1996 to Refuse Registration pursuant the Gaming Control Act, 1992,
Between:
Phuong Kim Thi Vo Appellant
and
Registrar, Alcohol Cannabis and Gaming Regulation and Public Protection Act, 1996 Respondent
DECISION and ORDER
ADJUDICATOR: Stephen Scharbach, Member
APPEARANCES:
For the Appellant: Angelo Minardi, Counsel
For the Registrar: Rena Khan, Counsel
HEARD: February 9, 2021
DATE OF DECISION and ORDER: March 09, 2021
OVERVIEW
1This is an appeal from a notice of proposed order issued by the Registrar, Alcohol, Cannabis and Gaming Regulation and Public Protection Act, 1996 (“Registrar”) to refuse registration to Ms. Phuong Kim Thi Vo (“appellant”) as a gaming assistant under the Gaming Control Act.
2The Registrar proposes to deny registration on the basis that, having regard to the appellant’s past conduct, there are reasonable grounds to believe that she will not act as a gaming assistant in accordance with the law, or with integrity, honesty or in the public interest.
3The appellant requested a hearing before this Tribunal, and that hearing took place on February 9, 2021 via video conference.
4After considering the evidence and submissions provided by the parties, I conclude that the appellant’s application for registration should be denied, and I confirm the Registrar’s proposal to refuse registration.
THE LAW
5Under the Gaming Control Act, 19921 (“Act”), no person may participate in, or provide services related to the operation of a gaming site (i.e. a casino), unless the person is registered as a “gaming assistant”.
6Applications for registration are submitted to and assessed by the Registrar. The Act provides that the Registrar “…may make such inquiries and conduct such investigations into the character, financial history and competence of an applicant for registration…as are necessary to determine whether the applicant meets the requirements of this Act and the regulations.”2
7The Act and regulations contain several requirements for registration but the only one the Registrar relies on in this case is contained in s. 11 of the Act, which provides that:
The Registrar shall refuse to register an applicant as a gaming assistant …if,
(a) there are reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant will not act as a gaming assistant in accordance with law, or with integrity, honesty, or in the public interest, having regard to the past conduct of the applicant … (emphasis added)
8If the Registrar proposes to refuse registration, the Registrar must give the applicant written notice, including reasons for the proposed refusal and notification of the applicant’s right to a hearing before this Tribunal.
9At a hearing, the onus is on the Registrar to prove the facts which support reasonable grounds to believe the appellant will not act as a gaming assistant as required.
10After holding a hearing, the Tribunal may confirm or set aside the Registrar’s proposed order, may substitute its opinion for that of the Registrar, and may direct the Registrar to take such action as the Tribunal consider appropriate to give effect to the purposes of the Act.3
THE ISSUE
11Has the Registrar established reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant will not act as a gaming assistant in accordance with law, or with integrity, honesty, or in the public interest, having regard to her past conduct?
DECISION
12The Registrar has demonstrated reasonable grounds to believe that the appellant will not act as a gaming assistant in accordance with law, or with integrity, honesty, or in the public interest. I therefore confirm the Registrar’s proposal.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
13According to the Registrar’s notice of proposal, two aspects of the appellant’s past conduct provide reasonable grounds to refuse the application:
- The appellant attended at an illegal gaming house on about 10 occasions in 2018.
- In her application for registration, the appellant failed to disclose a 2007 criminal charge for illegal production of cannabis, or that she was investigated by police in 2018 about her involvement with the illegal gaming house.
14My analysis and findings on each of those issues is set out below.
A. Attendance at an Illegal Gaming House
15Based on evidence called by the Registrar, I am satisfied that on November 26, 2018, the appellant was found by police in an illegal gaming house and that she attended those premises on several previous occasions.
16On November 26, 2018, York Regional Police responded to a report of a gun at an illegal gaming house in Markham, Ontario. The police arrived at the location and found the unit to be locked with multiple cameras pointing to the entrance. After about a minute, the police were let in where they encountered approximately 25-30 people, including the appellant. They eventually confirmed that the patrons were safe and no incident involving a gun had occurred.
17According to the police report, in searching the premises for a gun, the police discovered evidence that they had interrupted the operation of an illegal gaming house. That evidence included:
- multiple poker tables, and numerous chips on the tables,
- three functioning gaming machines,
- three large TVs inside the unit with multiple surveillance angles of the exterior of the unit,
- bundles of cash were found in a drawer, in