1Edward Verge (the “appellant”) appeals the 45-day impoundment of his Volvo S60/S65 on May 4, 2025, under s. 55.1 of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.H.8 (the “Act”).

2The owner of a vehicle which has been impounded in accordance with s. 55.1 may, under the provisions of s. 50.2 of the Act, appeal the impoundment and request an order from the Licence Appeal Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) that the Registrar release the vehicle.

3For the Tribunal to order the vehicle released, the appellant must prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he/she satisfies at least one of the five grounds set out in s. 50.2(3) of the Act. The appellant appealed on the grounds that the driver’s licence of the driver of the motor vehicle at the time it was detained in order to be impounded was not then under suspension, and that the driver’s licence of the driver of the motor vehicle at the time it was detained in order to be impounded did not have a condition prohibiting the driver from driving a motor vehicle without an ignition interlock device, in accordance with s. 50.2(3)(b) of the Act.

4At the hearing, the parties agreed that there was no condition of an ignition interlock device at issue for this appeal and this issue was withdrawn.

ISSUE

5The issue in dispute is:

i. Was the driver’s licence of the driver of the motor vehicle at the time it was detained in order to be impounded under suspension?

RESULT

6Based on the evidence presented at the hearing, and for the reasons given below, I find that the driver’s licence of the driver of the motor vehicle at the time it was detained in order to be impounded was under suspension as per s. 50.2(3)(b) of the Act. The Registrar’s impoundment of the vehicle is confirmed.

ANALYSIS

Circumstances leading to the impoundment

7Under s. 55.1(1) of the Act, where a police officer is satisfied that a person was driving a motor vehicle while his or her licence was under suspension for certain [Criminal Code](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-46/latest/rsc-1