Citation: Beaulieu v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles, 2023 ONLAT 15479

Licence Appeal Tribunal File Number: 15479/MED

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

Between:

Gabriel Beaulieu

Appellant

and

Registrar of Motor Vehicles

Respondent

DECISION

PANEL:

Dr. Dimitri Louvish Rupinder Hans

APPEARANCES:

For the Appellant:

Gabriel Beaulieu, Appellant

For the Respondent:

Ian Sookram, Representative

HEARD: January 3, 2024

OVERVIEW

1Gabriel Beaulieu (the “appellant”) appeals the decision of the Registrar of Motor Vehicles (the “Registrar” or “respondent”) to suspend his Class G driver’s licence for medical reasons, specifically an alcohol use disorder and substance use disorder, under s. 47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8 (the “Act”).

2The appellant appeals the suspension and asks the Tribunal to set aside the Registrar’s decision to suspend his driver’s licence.

3Having considered all the evidence and for the reasons that follow, we set aside the decision of the Registrar.

ISSUES

4The issue in this appeal is whether the appellant suffers from a medical condition that is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle safely.

5To resolve that issue, we will address the following questions:

i. Does the appellant suffer from a medical condition, namely an alcohol use disorder and/or substance use disorder?

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

RESULT

6We find the appellant does suffer from an alcohol use disorder and substance use disorder but that it will not significantly interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle safely. We set aside the Registrar’s decision to suspend the appellant’s driver’s licence.

ANALYSIS

The Law

7The Registrar has the authority under s.47(1)(g) of the Act to suspend or cancel a driver’s licence. One sufficient reason to suspend a driver’s licence under s.47(1)(g) of the Act is if the driver suffers from a medical condition or addiction likely to significantly interfere with his or her ability to drive safely.

8Section 14(1)(a) of O. Reg. 340/94 enacted under the Act requires 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 his or her ability to drive a motor vehicle of the applicable class safely.”

9Section 203(1) of the Act requires medical professionals to report prescribed medical conditions to the Registrar, while s. 203(2) gives medical professionals the discretion to report medical conditions that they believe might make it dangerous for a person to drive.

10Section 14(2)(a) of O. Reg. 340/94 allows the Registrar to consider the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators Medical Standards for Drivers (“CCMTA Standards”) when determining whether the requirements of s. 14(1) are met. The CCMTA Standards are not binding on the Registrar or on this Tribunal.

11The Registrar has the burden of establishing on a balance of probabilities that one or more grounds for suspending a driver’s licence has been made out.

12Pursuant to section 50(2) of the Act, after a hearing, the Tribunal may confirm, modify or set aside the decision or order of the Registrar.

Does the appellant suffer from an alcohol use disorder and/or a substance use disorder?

13The evidence satisfies us that the appellant suffers from both an alcohol use disorder and a substance use disorder. There is no dispute between the parties in this regard and both agree that the appellant suffers from an alcohol use disorder and substance use disorder.

14We note that the medical evidence presented at the hearing supports the conclusion that the appellant suffers from an alcohol use disorder and substance use disorder including the Medical Condition Report (“MCR”) dated May 5, 2023, completed by Dr. David Collins. The MCR notes that the appellant suffers from an alcohol dependence and a drug dependence. The MCR specifies cocaine and alcohol use disorder and that treatment was initiated recently.

15A medical report from Dr. Collins, dated November 16, 2023, states the appellant has an alcohol use disorder and cocaine use disorder. The report notes that as of May 5, 2023, the alcohol use disorder has been in remission with five negative random alcohol level tests. The report further states that cocaine use disorder is in remission since May 2023 per the patient; however, biochemical reporting suggests that cocaine use has been in remission since August 2023 with three positive results for cocaine prior.

16The substance use assessment, dated November 23, 2023 and completed by Dr. Collins, notes the appellant’s moderate substance use disorder with regards to alcohol and illicit substances. The period of abstinence is noted as less than six months.

17The appellant acknowledges that he was not the best state of mind when his licence was suspended and that he was using alcohol and illicit substances to assist with his mental health. He realized that this use was not helping him so he sought professional assistance.

18Given the evidence before us, we find on a balance of probabilities that the appellant suffers from an alcohol use disorder and substance use disorder.

Is the appellant’s alcohol use disorder and/or substance use disorder likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a vehicle safely?

19The Registrar has the burden of establishing, on a balance of probabilities, that the appellant’s alcohol use disorder and/or substance use disorder is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle of the applicable class safely. We find that the Registrar has not met its burden.

20The Registrar relies on the CCMTA Standards which provide that drivers suffering from substance use disorder (alcohol and illicit drugs, such as cocaine) may be eligible for a licence if they meet the criteria for remission and/or have abstained from alcohol/drugs for a period of 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 recognised by the licensing authority, and the successful completion of a drug rehabilitation program.

21The Tribunal is entitled to take the CCMTA Standards into consideration but is not bound by them.

22While the CCMTA Standards are well-reasoned and provide assistance, every case must be considered on its own facts.

23When considering the evidence, the Tribunal found persuasive the testimony of the appellant. The appellant testified that he used cocaine for a week and a half in total, about ten days. He testified that he used the cocaine by himself and that he obtained the cocaine from a person that had come to his place of employment. Since that occasion, he has had no contact with that person. Other than cocaine for that ten-day period, he has never used any other substances. The appellant testified that the last time he used cocaine was about May 2023. In his November 16, 2023 medical report, Dr. Collin’s states that cocaine use disorder is in remission since May 2023 by patient report, however, biochemical reporting suggest cocaine use in remission since August, 2023 with three positive results for cocaine use prior. The appellant testified that the three positive tests could be residual traces of substances, and the doctor told him they could be false positives. He is adamant that he has not used any cocaine since May 2023.

24The appellant further testified that he has not used alcohol since May 2023. He relies upon the medial reports of Dr. Collins wherein he notes that the appellant’s alcohol use disorder is in remission since May 29, 2023 biochemically and by the appellant’s report. There have been five negative random alcohol levels tests.

25The appellant testified that initially he was attending one-on-one treatment/counselling and he found it helpful. However, he stopped attending as he was experiencing transportation issues given that he lives in a remote area. Since then, he has asked his employer for counseling for substance use which is covered by his employment benefits. The counselling is arranged and will be weekly or every two weeks and there is no end date. He hopes to continue with this one-on-one counseling for his alcohol and substance use for the foreseeable future.

26The appellant testified that he works for the military, that his employer has put him on modified duties and that he is subject to random drug and alcohol testing. His employer performs the random testing several times a week. He testified that the testing is conducted by a military nurse in a hospital. The random testing began in April 2023, and will continue for at least a one-year period and longer should the appellant want permission to carry a firearm. The appellant testified that failing a random test would have serious ramifications for him as he would lose his employment. He testified that he is committed to remaining free of alcohol and drugs and maintaining his employment.

27The appellant further testified that he has never had any drinking and driving issues and has not been charged with any related Criminal Code of Canada offences. The appellant’s driving records show no alcohol-related infractions. He testified that he did not drive while under the influence.

28The appellant testified that he needs his vehicle to drive to work and to attend to his day-to-day tasks. He resides about 8 to 10 kilometres from his workplace and it usually takes him about an hour to walk to work and an hour to walk back home. Getting to and from work has been difficult particularly as the weather is getting colder. The appellant testified that he is fine to drive and does not pose a safety risk particularly as he has been free of alcohol and substance since May 2023.

29We accept the appellant’s testimony that he has been free of alcohol since May 2023, and that should he test positive for alcohol or drugs, he would lose his employment. We accept that he has been free of cocaine since at least August 2023. We accept his testimony that he is committed to attending his arranged alcohol and drug counselling for the foreseeable future. He is in remission and is committed to remaining abstinent. Based upon his counseling received and scheduled, and random alcohol and drug testing, we are satisfied that his medical condition is not likely to significant interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle.

30While the CCMTA Standards provide assistance, every case must be decided on its own merits. In our view, the appellant’s driving record discloses no alcohol-related infractions, he is subject to random testing by his employer, and has secured ongoing addictions counseling through his work benefits.

31Given the above, we find the Registrar has not established that the appellant’s alcohol use disorder and substance use disorder are likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely.

ORDER

32For the reasons set out above, pursuant to section 50(2) of the Act, we find the appellant does suffer from an alcohol use disorder and substance use disorder, but that they will not significantly interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle safely. We set aside the Registrar’s decision to suspend the appellant’s driver’s licence.