Newman Bridger v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles, 2021 CanLII 35581

Date: 2021-04-29

Appeal 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:

Newman Bridger

Appellant

and

Registrar of Motor Vehicles

Respondent

DECISION AND ORDER

Adjudicator: Dr. Peter Savage, Member

Appearances:

For the Appellant: Newman Bridger, Self-Represented

For the Respondent: Kyle Biel, Agent for the Registrar

Heard by Teleconference: April 13, 2021

REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER

A. OVERVIEW:

1On January 22, 2021, the Registrar suspended the appellant’s D and G licences under s. 47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8 (the “HTA”), after receiving a report from a physician that the appellant suffers from diabetes with hypoglycemic unawareness, a condition likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely. The appellant appeals the suspension and asks the Tribunal to reinstate his licence.

2Having considered all of the evidence and for the reasons that follow, the Tribunal confirms the Registrar’s decision to suspend the appellant’s driver’s licence for medical reasons.

B. ISSUES:

3The issue in this appeal is whether the appellant suffers from a medical condition, specifically hypoglycemic unawareness, which is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a vehicle safely.

4To 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:

5Under 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)(g) of the HTA and s. 14(1)(a) of O. Reg. 340/94 under the HTA (the “Regulation”).

6Under 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.

7A person whose licence is suspended under these provisions may appeal the suspension to the Tribunal under s. 50(1) of the HTA.

8On appeal, the Registrar has the burden of establishing, on a balance of probabilities, that the appellant’s ability to drive safely is significantly affected by a medical condition.

9Following 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?

10The Registrar alleges that the appellant suffers from hypoglycemic unawareness based on the reports of Dr. Crummey and the testimony of the appellant. The Registrar confirms the condition was discovered on a routine D licence renewal and initially was described as diabetic hypoglycemia but was further classified as hypoglycemic unawareness as more medical information was received.

11The appellant does not deny the fact he has had hypoglycemic unawareness episodes but asserts he knows his own body and has had diabetes for many years and knows when his sugars are low. He only has hypoglycemic unawareness on days when he stays in bed too long and doesn’t have the proper food soon enough. He feels he can control this.

12The medical evidence presented at the hearing supports the conclusion that the appellant suffers from periods of hypoglycemia associated with hypoglycemic unawareness. This diagnosis was confirmed by Dr. Crummey in the medical questionnaire submitted April 9, 2021.

13The appellant’s testimony also confirms periods of hypoglycemic confusion which so far, he recognizes and deals with by taking a sweet drink or a candy. He maintains these episodes would never interfere with his driving.

14According to the appellant, he has had the same dose of insulin and metformin (an oral diabetic medication) for many years. He has not taken his blood sugar regularly and only in the last month has he been taking a morning sugar reading. He spoke to a diabetic dietician but feels he knows his own body and doesn’t need to make changes in his diabetic management. He plans to keep his blood sugar at a high level (9 or over, normal being 5-7). He has never seen a diabetic specialist and has no plans to change his approach to diabetes. He does not attend Dr. Crummey on a regular basis but has known him for years.

B. If the appellant suffers from a medical condition, is it likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a vehicle safely?

22The Registrar has the burden of establishing that the appellant’s medical condition is likely to significantly interfere with her ability to drive a motor vehicle safely. We find that the Registrar has met that burden.

23The Registrar drew my attention to the CCMTA (Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators) Medical Standards for Drivers. He pointed to the portions of the standards that highlight the dangers that hypoglycemic unawareness could cause while driving and he also outlined the requirements for considering licence reinstatement. This would include a period of stability with regular blood sugar monitoring and documentation as well as a confirmatory HGA1C blood test. The Registrar maintains that none of these conditions have been met.

24The appellant maintains he has a safe driving record and points to a letter from his family doctor saying he is fit to drive. The appellant admits under cross-examination that his family doctor has not changed his diabetic medications in years, has not sent him to a diabetic specialist, and had not seen him in over 6 months at the time he wrote the note saying he was fit to drive.

25The appellant testified the recent death of his wife had set him back emotionally and physically. He did not know how to cook and was not eating properly but recently his son had moved into the home and was doing some cooking and that was helping him with his diabetic management. The appellant further testifies he doesn’t see the need for further testing or changes in medical management as he knows his own body and how to control his diabetes.

28The Registrar made the following submissions with respect to how the appellant’s condition affects the appellant’s ability to drive:

1. the appellant’s condition is not yet stable. The respondent argues that a period of stability is required;

2. the appellant’s condition has periods of low blood sugar and these have produced the symptoms of hypoglycemic confusion;

3. the appellant has not been monitoring his blood sugar on a regular basis and doesn’t appear to believe that more regular monitoring is needed;

4. the appellant has a pattern of self-management of his diabetes and shows no plans to change his approach;

5. The Registrar feels Dr. Crummey’s note saying the appellant is safe to drive lacks evidence to confirm that position.

6. The appellant’s dietary habits are not consistent with good diabetic management.

29The evidence supports the Registrar’s submissions. I find, on a balance of probabilities, that the appellant’s medical condition of hypoglycemic confusion 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 he has a significant health issue and that he lacks insight into the potential dangers this condition and its impact on his ability to drive safely. The CCMTA standards point out hypoglycemic unawareness can significantly impair the sensory, motor and cognitive functions required for driving. The appellant made it clear that he feels he can control his diabetes based on how he feels and has no plans to take a more aggressive position on management of his diabetes. In making this finding I also considered that the D-licence at issue allows the appellant to drive a large truck.

E. ORDER:

30For the reasons set out above, pursuant to subsection 50(2) of the HTA, I confirm the Registrar’s decision to suspend the appellant’s driver’s licence for medical reasons.