Jessica Stark v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles, 2021 CanLII 345

Licence Appeal Tribunal

Date: 2021-01-06

Appeal under section 50.2 of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, from an impoundment of a motor vehicle under section 55.1 of the Act

Between:

Jessica Stark

Appellant

and

Registrar of Motor Vehicles

Respondent

DECISION AND ORDER

ADJUDICATOR: Theodore Crljenica, Member

APPEARANCES:

For the Appellant: No one appeared for the Appellant

For the Respondent: Sanjay Kapur, Agent

Heard by Teleconference: January 5, 2021

REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER

OVERVIEW

1A teleconference hearing was scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m. on January 5, 2021 to consider an appeal filed by Jessica Stark (the “appellant”) under section 50.2 of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8 (the “Act”) relating to the impoundment of her motor vehicle.

2The appellant’s motor vehicle was impounded on November 29, 2020. At the time of the impoundment the operator was driving with a suspended licence. A Notice of Impoundment was issued for a period of 45 days.

3For the reasons set out below, the appeal is dismissed, and the impoundment is confirmed.

ISSUE:

4The appellant’s only ground of appeal is whether her vehicle was stolen at the time that it was being driven by the suspended driver.

THE HEARING

5The appellant was served with a Notice of Hearing dated December 23, 2020 by which she was notified that her appeal would be heard at 9:30 a.m. on January 5, 2021. The call-in details were set out in the Notice of Hearing.

6As the appellant had not called in by 9:35 a.m., the Case Management Officer was instructed to contact the appellant to remind her of the hearing. The appellant was emailed at the email address she provided to the Tribunal and a message was left on her voice mail reminding her of the hearing.

7The appellant did not respond to the email or voice mail and did not call in to the hearing. I allowed the applicant a half-hour past the scheduled hearing time to call in.

8The respondent requested that the appeal be dismissed on the basis that the appellant bears the onus to prove that her vehicle was stolen, and the appellant did not present any evidence due to her failure to call in.

9As requested, the appeal is dismissed. I accept the respondent’s submissions that the appellant has failed to satisfy her onus to prove that the vehicle was stolen at the time it was detained. The hearing concluded at 10:01 a.m.

ORDER

10For the reasons set out above the appeal is dismissed and the impoundment is confirmed.