Licence Appeal Tribunal File Number: 18374/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” or “HTA”), from a decision of the Minister of Transportation to downgrade the class of licence pursuant to Section 32(5)(b) of the Act.

Between:

Michel Poirier

Appellant

and

Minister of Transportation

Respondent

DECISION

ADJUDICATOR:

Dr. Kailey Minnings

APPEARANCES:

For the Appellant:

Michel Poirier, self-represented

For the Respondent:

Stephen Grootenboer, Representative

HEARD: May 6, 2026

OVERVIEW

1Michel Poirier (the “appellant”) filed a Notice of Appeal, dated March 5, 2026, from the decision of the Minister of Transportation (“Minister” or “respondent”) to downgrade his Class AZ licence to a Class G licence pursuant to s. 32(5) of the HTA.

2The hearing of this appeal took place on May 6, 2025.

3At the commencement of the hearing, the following preliminary issue was addressed.

PRELIMINARY ISSUE – Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss Appeal

4By Notice of Motion dated March 24, 2026, the respondent brought a motion seeking to have this appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and sent a copy to both the Tribunal and to the appellant.

5On March 25, 2026, the Tribunal directed that the motion be heard at the commencement of the hearing and the parties were advised via email.

6The appellant indicated that he received the Notice of Motion from the respondent and direction from the Tribunal via email, but that he had not reviewed the materials and that he was not near a computer at the time of the hearing. Nonetheless he wished to proceed.

7To summarize the respondent’s submissions, the appeal should be dismissed without a hearing because the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear this appeal for the following reasons:

i. There is currently no medical downgrade under s. 32(5)(b)(i) of the HTA for the appellant;

ii. The appellant’s Class AZ licence downgrade was issued pursuant to s. 32(5)(b)(ii) of the HTA. This section provides authority for the respondent to take actions in respect of driver’s licence holders: “where the person fails to submit to or to successfully complete the examinations or fails to meet the other prescribed requirements, impose the conditions authorized by the regulations, remove any endorsements, suspend or cancel the driver’s licence held by the person or change the class or classes of driver’s licence held by the person”. The respondent submits that the appellant missed the deadline to submit required medical information and that his commercial licence was downgraded as a result;

iii. Subsection 15(1) of Ontario Regulation 340/94 (the “Regulation”) states that the respondent may require the holder of a driver’s licence at any time to provide medical information. The respondent submits that failure to do so provides a ground for suspension under s. 32(5)(b)(ii) of the HTA;

iv. The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear an appeal for a suspension under s. 32(5)(b)(ii). The Tribunal may hear appeals only for decisions made under s. 32(5)(b)(i) because it is the only subsection where a right of appeal to the Tribunal has been prescribed. The applicable regulatory provision is s. 25.1 of the Regulation which states: “A decision made by the Minister under subclause 32(5)(b)(i) of the Act is prescribed as a kind of decision a person may appeal under s. 50 of the Act.”

8In support of the motion, the respondent relied on:

i. A January 30, 2025 letter from the Minister to the appellant, which states,

The ministry has reviewed your case in light of the subsequent report filed on your behalf. However, further information is required…

What the Ministry requires from you: Take this letter to your treating physician, specialist or nurse practitioner and have the following information sent to the Driver Medical Review Office:

o Confirmation that you are assessed as NYHA Class I or II

o Confirmation that you have not been hospitalized for the purpose of receiving intravenous ionotropic therapy for your end stage heart failure

o Confirmation that the current medication regiment [sic] does not result an [sic] any side effects such as sedation, impairment of concentration, impairment of judgement and blurred or double vision

… What the Ministry will do if the information is not received:

If the report/assessment(s) including required forms (if applicable) are not received by March 31, 2025, your commercial class licence will be changed to a Class ‘G’, which will be mailed to you…

ii. A screenshot of the “Licensing and Control System” dated March 19, 2026, which shows the word “autodown” beside a date of April 22, 2025. The respondent submits that this indicates that the appellant’s commercial licence was automatically downgraded once the March 31, 2025 deadline passed because of a failure to file a medical report. The respondent also submits that the “autodown” occurred on April 22, 2025 because the system allows for a short grace period following the deadline.

iii. A July 11, 2025 letter from the Minister to the appellant, which indicates that medical documents were filed and reviewed, and that more information is needed. The letter indicates, “If the report/assessment(s) including required forms (if applicable) are not received, we will be unable to consider your application for a commercial licence.” The respondent submits that the wording of this letter indicates that the licence was already downgraded at the time of his filing additional documents, rather than indicating that the appellant was downgraded due to a medical condition.

iv. A September 3, 2025 letter from the Minister to the appellant, which indicates that the appellant is no longer eligible to apply for a commercial class driver’s licence due to a medical condition. Again, the respondent submits that this letter suggests that the licence was already downgraded, that the medical information subsequently submitted constitutes an application for a commercial licence, and that the letter does not indicate that the licence was downgraded due to a medical condition.

9In addition to these submissions, I raised with the parties the effect of the statement in the September 3, 2025 letter sent to the appellant by the Minister advising him that he is no longer eligible to apply for a commercial class driver’s licence: “If you disagree with the decision, you may appeal to the Licence Appeal Tribunal.” The respondent’s representative submitted the addition of this sentence is a clerical error.

10The appellant did not make any submissions specifically about the Tribunal’s jurisdiction to hear his appeal. However, the appellant submits that he believes his driver’s licence has been wrongfully downgraded; that while he did receive a G licence in the mail, he did not receive any express notice of the downgrade; that his medical condition is stable; and that to his knowledge, either he or his physician’s office have always sent any required medical documents to the Minister when requested.

RESULT OF THE RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO DISMISS

11I conclude that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear this appeal. Given that I have found that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction, the appeal is dismissed without a hearing on the merits.

12Both parties were advised at the hearing that the appeal is dismissed for reasons to follow later in writing. These are the reasons.

ANALYSIS

The downgrade of the appellant’s driver’s licence is under s. 32(5)(b)(ii)

13The Tribunal is created by statute and has only the powers given to it by legislation set out in the HTA and the Regulation.

14Section 50(1) of the HTA provides for an appeal of a decision under s. 32(5) of the HTA for which there is a right of appeal pursuant to a regulation made under clause 32(14)(n) or a decision or order of the Registrar under s. 17 or 47. Section 25.1 of the Regulation provides that a decision made by the Minister under subclause 32(5)(b)(i) of the HTA is prescribed as a kind of decision a person may appeal under s. 50 of the HTA.

15There is no right of appeal provided for a decision under s. 32(5)(b)(ii) of the HTA.

16I am satisfied that the respondent is authorized by the HTA and clause 15(1)(e) of the Regulation to ask a driver at any time to provide medical information. Failure to provide medical information as required provides a ground for suspension under s. 32(5)(b)(ii) of the HTA. There is no jurisdiction granted to the Tribunal under the HTA or the Regulation to hear an appeal from a downgrade of a driver’s licence made under s. 32(5)(b)(ii) of the HTA. Also, there is no source of jurisdiction that allows the Tribunal to set aside this requirement or to exempt a driver from a requirement to submit medical information under clause 15(1)(e) of the Regulation.

17The combined effect of s. 32(5)(b)(ii) of the HTA and clause 15(1)(e) of the Regulation compel the appellant to submit medical information when asked to do so by the Minister. An appeal of a downgrade resulting from failure to do so within the required timeframe is outside the scope of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction as described in s. 50 of the HTA.

18When questioned, the respondent admits that no notice was given to the appellant that his licence was downgraded, aside from the statement in the January 30, 2025 letter that his commercial licence would be downgraded if the medical information was not received by March 31, 2025. The respondent indicates that once that deadline passed, the commercial licence was automatically downgraded and the appellant was sent a G licence in the mail. Upon further questioning from the Tribunal, respondent also admits that none of the documents submitted in support of the Motion specify which clause of s. 32(5) the downgrade was made under.

19It is regrettable that the respondent did not expressly advise the appellant of the downgrade or identify the legislative authority pursuant to which it was made. However, I accept the respondent’s submissions and find that, on a balance of probabilities, the downgrade was made under s. 32(5)(b)(ii) for failure to submit medical information. This is distinct from s. 32(5)(b)(i) where the Minister takes an action on a driver’s licence in accordance with the results of an examination.

20I accept that the January 30, 2025 letter to the appellant indicated that his commercial licence would be downgraded if the medical information was not received by the March 31, 2025 deadline, and that the appellant failed to submit the information by that deadline. I am satisfied that this resulted in a downgrade for failure to submit medical examinations and that the Licencing Control System reflects this.

21While the wording of the July 11, 2025 and September 3, 2025 letters to the appellant does support that the commercial licence had already been downgraded by the time the appellant sent in the requested medical information, it is unfortunate that the Minister continued to request further medical documents; did not provide express notification of the downgrade or clearly indicate to the appellant what legislation was used in the decision to downgrade his licence; and erroneously indicated that he could appeal this decision to the Tribunal. I find that these communications were not clear and created unnecessary confusion and challenges for the appellant. Even so, I find that neither the appellant nor the respondent can create a right of appeal where neither the legislation nor the regulation do so.

22As I have found that the Minster downgraded the appellant’s driver’s licence pursuant to s. 32(5)(b)(ii) of the Act, it follows that I do not have jurisdiction to hear an appeal from that decision under 50(1) of the Act. There is no Regulation made under s. 32(14)(n) that creates a right of appeal for this subsection. This ground of appeal is therefore dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

APPEAL ON THE MERITS NOT DETERMINED AT THE HEARING

23Given that I have found that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear this appeal, I decline to proceed to hear the appellant’s appeal on the merits.

ORDER

24I find that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear this appeal and I dismiss this appeal.

Released: May 15, 2026

__________________________

Dr. Kailey Minnings

Adjudicator