Date: 2021-06-09

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:

Jeff Holmlund

Appellant

and

Registrar of Motor Vehicles

Respondent

DECISION AND ORDER

ADJUDICATORS: Dr. Dimitri Louvish, Member

Colin Osterberg, Member

APPEARANCES

For the Appellant: Jeff Holmlund, Self-represented

For the Respondent: Sonia De Santis, Agent

Heard by Teleconference: May 26, 2021

REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER

A. Overview

[ 1 ] On March 21, 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 “Act”), after receiving a report from a treating physician that the appellant suffers from alcohol use disorder that is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely. The appellant appeals the suspension and asks the Tribunal to reinstate his licence.

[ 2 ] Having considered all the evidence and for the reasons which follow, we confirm the Registrar’s decision to suspend the appellant’s driver’s licence for medical reasons, but we modify the decision and order that the appellant’s licence is to be reinstated upon the Registrar’s receipt of confirmation that the appellant has remained abstinent and that his health care provider is supportive of reinstatement of his driving privilege.

B. ISSUES

[ 3 ] The issue in this appeal is whether the appellant suffers from alcohol use disorder that is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a vehicle safely.

[ 4 ] To resolve that issue, we will address the following questions:

a. Does the appellant suffer from alcohol use disorder?

b. If the appellant does suffer from alcohol use disorder, is this likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle safely?

C. lAW

[ 5 ] Under the Act, the Registrar is responsible for ensuring that drivers are medically fit to drive vehicles on highways. In this case, the Registrar acted pursuant to s. 47(1) of the Act and s. 14(1)(b) of O. Reg. 340/94 under the Act (the “Regulation”).

[ 6 ] 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.

[ 7 ] Section 14(2)(a) of the Regulation allows the Registrar to consider the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators Medical Standards for Drivers (the “CCMTA Standards”) when determining whether the requirements of s. 14(1) are met. The Tribunal may take the CCMTA Standards into consideration, although they are not binding on us.

[ 8 ] A person whose licence is suspended under these provisions may appeal the suspension to the Tribunal under s. 50(1) of the Act.

[ 9 ] 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 alcohol use disorder.

[ 10 ] Following a hearing, the Tribunal may, under s. 50(2) of the Act, confirm, modify or set aside the decision or order of the Registrar.

D. EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS

a. Does the appellant suffer from alcohol use disorder?

[ 11 ] The evidence shows that the appellant suffers from alcohol use disorder.

[ 12 ] On March 9, 2021, the appellant’s family doctor, Dr. Michael Ali, submitted a Medical Condition Report to the Registrar stating that the appellant was diagnosed with an uncontrolled substance use disorder and was non-compliant with treatment recommendations.

[ 13 ] On April 15, 2021, Dr. Ali completed a Substance Use Assessment which states that the appellant suffers severe substance use disorder which was defined as the repetitive inappropriate use of alcohol or any psychoactive substance associated with loss of control, inability to abstain, a preoccupation with obtaining alcohol, and withdrawal symptoms. The Substance Use Assessment indicates that the appellant last used alcohol on March 8, 2021, and that he was attending supervised substance abuse treatment programs.

[ 14 ] On April 21, 2021, as part of his submissions in this appeal, the appellant wrote that he did not deny that the has struggled with alcoholism over the last eight years. He stated that his alcoholism resulted from a series of traumatic events which he was unable to cope with in a healthy manner.

[ 15 ] At the hearing, the appellant testified that he has struggled with depression and anxiety and that he has used alcohol to deal with stressful or traumatic episodes in his life. He stated that approximately eight years ago, in response to the break-up of his long-term marriage, the appellant’s use of alcohol became a significant problem. He developed a pattern of drinking significant quantities of liquor for weeks at a time. The appellant said that he could go weeks or months without drinking, but then a stressful event would occur, and he would start drinking heavily again. This pattern persisted, despite his involvement in individual substance abuse counselling starting in February 2020, until March 8, 2021, when he stopped drinking completely.

[ 16 ] We find that the Registrar has established on a balance of probabilities that the appellant suffers from alcohol use disorder.

b. Is the appellant’s alcohol use disorder likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a vehicle safely?

[ 17 ] The Registrar has the burden of establishing on a balance of probabilities that the appellant’s alcohol use disorder is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle safely.

[ 18 ] The Registrar relies on the CCMTA Standards which provide that drivers suffering from substance use disorder may be eligible for a licence if they meet the criteria for remission or have abstained from alcohol for twelve months. The CCMTA Standards also state that earlier re-licensing may be considered upon favourable recommendation from an addiction specialist and/or treating physician recognized by the licensing authority, and the successful completion of a drug rehabilitation program.

[ 19 ] In light of the appellant’s abstinence from alcohol since March 8, 2021, and his participation in substance abuse treatment programs, the Registrar takes the position that the appellant’s licence can be reinstated if the Registrar receives confirmation that the appellant has remained abstinent from alcohol for a period of six months and his heath care practitioner is supportive of his driving privilege.

[ 20 ] The appellant testified that he has never driven after drinking and that he has abstained from alcohol since March 8, 2021. He says that the loss of his licence was a wake-up call and that he is committed to continued abstinence. We find the appellant to be a credible witness. His testimony was supported by the following evidence.

[ 21 ] The appellant’s driving record shows no infractions, alcohol related or otherwise. The appellant’s sponsor at Alcoholics Anonymous (“AA”), Colin Coppins, testified that he has known the appellant for several years and has never known him to drink and drive.

[ 22 ] The appellant has been participating in individual substance abuse counselling at Four Counties Addiction Services Team (“FourCAST”) since February 13, 2020. On April 20, 2021, FourCAST wrote a letter stating that the appellant has consistently engaged and participated in individual counselling, intake support calls, and multiple groups during his admission to FourCAST.

[ 23 ] According to the Substance Use Assessment dated April 15, 2021, completed by Dr. Ali, the appellant had abstained from alcohol since March 8, 2021, and was attending FourCAST and AA.

[ 24 ] The appellant’s blood analysis completed on April 13, 2021 was negative for alcohol. His liver enzymes and the MCV were normal, indicating abstinence from alcohol.

[ 25 ] Colin Coppins testified that he speaks to the appellant regularly and it is his belief that the appellant is working hard every day and is committed to remaining abstinent.

[ 26 ] The appellant very much wants to return to riding motorcycles as soon as possible. He states that his depression and anxiety are significantly improved when he rides his motorcycle. Mr. Coppins is the leader of a motorcycle club whose members are primarily former drug addicts and alcoholics. He states that he has seen how much the appellant loves motorcycling and is hopeful that the appellant will be able to participate in the motorcycle club and eventually become a member. The appellant understands that, in order to participate in this activity and to become a member of the motorcycle club, he must be successful in abstaining from alcohol. We find that this will be a strong incentive for the appellant to continue his abstinence, particularly when driving.

[ 27 ] We find that the appellant is committed to remaining abstinent and has actively participated in his own rehabilitation. He has not used alcohol since March 8, 2021, submits to blood testing when available, regularly attends individual counselling, group counselling, and AA, and has the support of his AA sponsor.

[ 28 ] The Registrar agrees that it is reasonable that the appellant’s licence should be re-instated early on the basis of the CCMTA Standards but argues that it should remain suspended until six months after the appellant abstains from drinking alcohol and only if his health care provider is supportive of his licence reinstatement.

[ 29 ] The Registrar has not presented any evidence in support of the six-month abstinence requirement. The CCMTA Standards that the Registrar relies on only provide only that re-licencing may be considered earlier on favourable recommendation of the treating physician and completion of a drug rehabilitation program. The Standard also suggests that all drivers are eligible for a licence if they meet the criteria for remission and/or have abstained from the substance for 12 months. Despite many other sections of the CCMTA Standards containing 6-month waiting periods for various medical conditions, there is no such waiting period for substance use disorders.

[ 30 ] In our view, Registrar’s insistence on the six-month time frame is arbitrary in the circumstances of this case, particularly given that the appellant’s driving record discloses no alcohol-related infractions. However, the requirement that the appellant provide the Registrar with a recommendation supportive of his licence reinstatement is reasonable and supported by the CCMTA Standards.

[ 31 ] As noted above, the Tribunal is entitled to take the CCMTA Standards into consideration, but we are not bound by them. The overriding consideration in this appeal is whether the Registrar has proven on a balance of probabilities that the appellant’s alcohol use disorder is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle safely. The appellant’s circumstances, including his abstinence since March 8, 2021 and his participation in FourCAST and AA, are evidence that the appellant is on the right path. He has a support system in place which includes his family doctor, psychiatrist, substance abuse counsellor, and AA sponsor, which we believe make a relapse unlikely.

[ 32 ] We find that the appellant’s licence should be reinstated conditional upon the receipt by the Registrar of confirmation that the appellant continues to remain abstinent and upon his health care provider providing a report satisfactory to the Registrar supportive of reinstatement of the appellant’s driving privilege.

E. ORDER

[ 33 ] For the reasons set out above, pursuant to subsection 50(2) of the Act, we confirm the Registrar’s decision to suspend the appellant’s driver’s licence and modify that decision to order that the appellant’s licence is to be reinstated upon the Registrar’s receipt of confirmation that the appellant continues to remain abstinent and a report from the appellant’s health care provider satisfactory to the Registrar that is supportive of reinstatement of his driving privilege.

LICENCE APPEAL TRIBUNAL

Dr. Dimitri Louvish, Member

Colin Osterberg, Member

Released: June 9, 2021