Licence Appeal Tribunal File Number: 16505/MED

In the matter of an appeal under subsection 50(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8 (the “Act”), from a decision of the Registrar of Motor Vehicles to suspend a licence pursuant to subsection 47(1) of the Act.

Between:

Aja Wilson

Appellant

and

Registrar of Motor Vehicles

Respondent

DECISION

ADJUDICATOR: Dr. David To

APPEARANCES:

For the Appellant: Aja Wilson, Self-represented

For the Respondent: Ian Sookram, Representative

HEARD: December 20, 2024

OVERVIEW

1Aja Wilson (the “appellant”) appeals from the November 7, 2024 decision of the Registrar of Motor Vehicles (“Registrar”) to suspend her Class G licence under s. 47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8 (the “Act”) after the Registrar received a report from a treating physician that the appellant suffers from a medical condition that may affect her safety to drive.

2The Registrar has the authority under s. 47(1)(g) of the Act to suspend or cancel a driver’s licence for any sufficient reason. Paragraph 14(1)(a) of O. Reg. 340/94 under the Act (the “Regulation”) states that a holder of a driver’s licence must not suffer from any mental, emotional, nervous or physical condition or disability likely to significantly interfere with their ability to safely drive a motor vehicle of the applicable class safely. Under s. 14(2)(b) of the Regulation, the Minister of Transportation may require a driver to provide satisfactory evidence that they are able to drive safely.

3The Registrar takes the position that the appellant suffers from a medical condition, namely alcohol use disorder, that is likely to significantly interfere with her ability to drive safely and that this provides sufficient reason to suspend her licence under s. 47(1)(g) of the Act.

4The appellant appeals the suspension under s. 50(1) of the Act. She acknowledges that she suffers from alcohol use disorder but denies that this medical condition interferes with her ability to drive safely.

5Pursuant to s. 50(2) of the Act, after a hearing the Tribunal may confirm, modify, or set aside the decision or order of the Registrar.

ISSUES

6The issue in this appeal is whether the appellant suffers from a medical condition that is likely to significantly interfere with her ability to drive a motor vehicle of the applicable class safely.

7To resolve that issue, I will address the following questions:

i. Does the appellant suffer from alcohol use disorder?

ii. If so, is this likely to significantly interfere with her ability to drive a motor vehicle of the applicable class safely?

RESULT

8Having considered all the evidence and submissions and for the reasons that follow, I find that the Registrar has not satisfied its burden to establish that the appellant suffers from a medical condition that is likely to significantly interfere with her ability to drive a motor vehicle safely.

9I set aside the Registrar’s decision to suspend the appellant’s driver’s licence.

ANALYSIS

Does the appellant suffer from alcohol use disorder?

10The evidence presented at the hearing establishes that the appellant suffers from a medical condition, namely alcohol use disorder.

11The Registrar’s position is supported by medical reports completed by Dr. Barbeau, the appellant’s family physician. Dr. Barbeau’s most recent medical report, dated October 31, 2024, states that the appellant has a diagnosis of alcohol use disorder.

12The appellant acknowledged that she suffers from alcohol use disorder and explained that she is in remission.

13I find that the Registrar has established on a balance of probabilities that the appellant suffers from alcohol use disorder.

Is the appellant’s medical condition likely to significantly interfere with her ability to drive a motor vehicle safely?

14I find that the Registrar has not proven on a balance of probabilities that the appellant’s medical condition is likely to significantly interfere with her ability to drive a motor vehicle safely.

15The Registrar argues that alcohol use disorder interferes with the appellant’s ability to drive safely. The Registrar relies on Dr. Barbeau’s October 31, 2024 report which notes that the appellant has “severe substance use disorder” related to alcohol and has abstained from alcohol for “less than 6 months”.

16The Registrar relies on the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators Medical Standards for Drivers [February 2021] (the “CCMTA Standards”) which states that alcohol has effects on the functions necessary for driving, including reduced reaction times, reduced judgment and reduced motor coordination, and therefore there is a concern for road safety.

17Paragraph 14(2)(a) of the Regulation allows the Registrar to consider the CCMTA Standards when determining whether the requirements of s. 14(1) are met. The Tribunal may take the CCMTA Standards into consideration but, like the Registrar, is not bound by them.

18CCMTA Standard 15.6.3 recommends that a driver who has been diagnosed with substance use disorder, which includes alcohol use disorder, be considered eligible for a licence if the driver meets several criteria. These criteria include that the driver be in remission or have abstained from the substance for 12 months and that functional abilities necessary for driving are not impaired. It also provides that earlier re-licensing may be considered upon favourable recommendation from a treating physician and the successful completion of a drug rehabilitation program.

19The Registrar’s position is that the appellant has only abstained from alcohol since August 2024, which is approximately four and a half months as of the date of this hearing. The Registrar submits that, based on its own internal policies, a six-month period of abstinence is most appropriate based on its concerns over road safety.

20The appellant testified that she had abstained from alcohol from approximately October 2023 until late July 2024. This was supported by reports dated February 9, 2024 and May 3, 2024 from her family physician, Dr. Barbeau, who according to the appellant also practices addictions medicine.

21The appellant testified that she was forthcoming with her medical team and advised them she had an episode of relapse and had consumed alcohol in late July 2024 for four days and was able to subsequently independently stop drinking alcohol. She acknowledged the trigger that caused this relapse and explained she received treatment from her physician to mitigate this.

22In a follow-up Substance Use Assessment report dated October 31, 2024, Dr. Barbeau noted that the appellant’s alcohol use disorder had been stable for 3 months, her GGT blood test result was 11, and that she was medically stable to drive. The report also noted that the appellant had recently completed a supervised treatment program.

23Based on this October 31, 2024 report, the Registrar suspended the appellant’s driver’s licence in its letter dated November 7, 2024.

24The appellant submits that earlier re-licensing should be considered based on her significant efforts to control her medical condition over the past year and her family physician’s support that she is medically stable to drive. Based on the reasons below, I agree with the appellant’s position.

25As a licensed physician in Ontario, and as authorized by s.16 of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.22, I draw on generally recognized information within my specialized knowledge to take notice that an elevated level of GGT can indicate chronic alcohol abuse. The appellant’s GGT test according to Dr. Barbeau’s reports in April 2024 and October 2024 were within normal limits. This corroborates the appellant’s testimony that she was not consuming alcohol regularly.

26Although not bound by the CCMTA Standards, the Tribunal may consider them when making its decision. These Standards are the result of a lengthy and intensive process to provide medical standards based on the best evidence available and with a focus on functional ability to drive rather than exclusively on medical diagnoses. While each appeal including this one must be judged on its own merits, I am persuaded to apply the CCMTA Standards here.

27My review of the evidence shows that the criteria recommended for re-licensing outlined in CCMTA Standard 15.6.3 have been met.

28First, based on both recent and past reports in 2024 from Dr. Barbeau, who has been the appellant’s family physician since 2010, Dr. Barbeau did not recommend a functional driving assessment. There are no concerns regarding the appellant’s functional ability to drive, as required by the pertinent CCMTA Standard. Further, the appellant testified she has never driven while impaired; this is corroborated by her driving record which shows no history of alcohol related offences.

29Second, the CCMTA Standards do not define the specific period of abstinence for drivers with alcohol use disorder for earlier re-licensing if there is both a favourable recommendation from the treating physician and successful completion of a rehabilitation program. Dr. Barbeau wrote in her October 31, 2024 report that “[the appellant] is medically stable to drive”, which shows a favourable recommendation of the appellant’s return to driving from her treating physician. Dr. Barbeau also noted that the appellant completed a supervised treatment program.

30Earlier re-licensing is appropriate for several additional reasons. As noted by Dr. Barbeau, the appellant is taking a medication called gabapentin. The appellant explained she is adherent to taking gabapentin three times daily. As a physician, I take notice that gabapentin is effective in promoting abstinence in individuals with alcohol use disorder.

31Moreover, the appellant’s dedication to maintaining supports in her recovery from alcohol use disorder is commended. I found that the appellant was credible and forthright regarding these efforts. The appellant testified that she attends AA meetings four times each week and takes a leadership role to help her peers. She testified that she has been working full time this year and that her employer is supportive of her recovery. The appellant also explained that she attends weekly addictions counselling and has regular medical appointments to monitor her progress. In addition, she detailed her coping skills and explained how her support network assists her if she has an urge to consume alcohol.

32Based on the above reasons, although the appellant does have a history of severe alcohol use disorder, I am not satisfied on a balance of probabilities that the appellant’s medical condition is likely to significantly interfere with her ability to drive a Class G vehicle safely.

CONCLUSION

33I find that the Registrar has not discharged the onus of establishing on a balance of probabilities that the appellant’s medical condition, namely alcohol use disorder, is likely to significantly interfere with her ability to drive a motor vehicle of the applicable class safely.

ORDER

34For the reasons set out above, pursuant to s. 50(2) of the Act, I set aside the Registrar’s decision to suspend the appellant’s driver’s licence.