Court of Appeal for Ontario

Citation: Golden Flight Travel Ltd. (Hurontario Centre) v. Ontario (Consumer and Commercial Relations), 2009 ONCA 652

Date: 2009-09-15

Docket: C47805

Before: Winkler C.J.O., Sharpe and Armstrong JJ.A.

Between:

Golden Flight Travel Ltd. Operating as Hurontario Centre Action No: 02-BN-962

Appellant (Plaintiff)

and

Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations as represented by James Girling

Respondents (Defendants)

Counsel:

T.J. Law, for the appellant/(plaintiff)

Jim Smith, for the respondents (defendants)

Heard and released orally: September 10, 2009

On appeal from the judgment of Justice Thomas M. Dunn of the Superior Court of Justice dated February 6, 2006.

Endorsement

[1] The appellant, acting in person at trial, advanced a claim for damages flowing from charges brought against him under the Travel Industry Act. The claim was based essentially on malicious prosecution although the word negligence did appear in the statement of claim and the trial judge considered negligence. Before this court, Mr. Law, now acting for the appellant, advanced the appellant’s case solely on the basis of negligence. He submits that the Registrar under the Travel Industry Act was required to accord the appellant the rights to notice and a hearing required by s. 6. As the Registrar failed to do so, he submits there was no valid refusal to renew the appellant’s licence and the authorities were negligent in taking the position that the appellant did not have a licence.

[2] A claim based on negligence in this context raises many contentions issues. We dispose of the claim on the basis that we do not accept the core submission that the appellant was denied any right conferred by s. 6. The trial judge found that the appellant failed to pay the prescribed fee to make application for the renewal of his licence. That finding is supported by the evidence and not challenged. As the appellant had failed to pay the prescribed fee to apply for renewal of his licence, there was no pending application for renewal and accordingly no obligation to give the appellant notice or a hearing.

[3] Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with costs in the amount of $8,000 inclusive of GST and disbursements.

“W.K. Winkler C.J.O.”

“Robert J. Sharpe J.A.”

“R.P. Armstrong J.A.”