Registrar, Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario v. Lopez

CITATION: Registrar AGCO v. Lopez, 2024 ONSC 591 DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 327/23 DATE: 2024-01-26

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO DIVISIONAL COURT

RE: Registrar, Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario, Appellant AND: Richard Lopez, Respondent

BEFORE: Leiper J.

COUNSEL: Michael J. Sims and Ganeev Kaur Dhillon, for the Appellant, Registrar, Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario Richard Lopez, Respondent, self-represented Douglas Lee, for the Proposed Intervenor, Licence Appeal Tribunal

HEARD: In writing

ENDORSEMENT

[1] The Licence Appeal Tribunal ("LAT") brought an unopposed motion in writing for an order granting the LAT leave to intervene in this appeal, pursuant to rules 13.02 and 13.03(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194.

[2] I grant the motion to intervene on the terms below.

[3] The appeal concerns a decision made by the LAT under the Horse Racing Licence Act, 2015, S.O. 2015, c. 38, Sched. 9 (the "HRLA"). By decision dated April 27, 2023, the LAT found that the evidence at the hearing did not support the Appellant Registrar's Order dated March 16, 2023, to immediately suspend the Respondent Richard Lopez's licence as a Horseperson, Exercise Person and Association Official. The LAT set aside the Registrar's Order.

[4] The Appellant sought reconsideration which the LAT dismissed in its decision dated July 19, 2023.

[5] The Appellant served the Respondent and the LAT with a Notice of Appeal dated May 26, 2023, seeking to review the LAT's first decision.

[6] On the motion to intervene, the LAT seeks to provide submissions to the Court on questions of the scope of appeal, standard of review, the statutory framework of the LAT Act and the HRLA and the procedural history of this matter. The LAT does not intend to take any position on the merits of its decision or the outcome of the appeal. This is an appropriate role for tribunals before the courts. It is consistent with the recognition in Ontario Energy Board v Ontario Power Generation Inc., 2015 SCC 44 at paras. 52-57 in which the Supreme Court of Canada wrote that that courts determining tribunal standing will "balance the need for fully informed adjudication against the importance of maintaining tribunal impartiality." As noted in Ontario Energy Board, submissions from the tribunal can add value to appeal proceedings (at para. 46).

[7] The proposal filed by LAT in its materials establish that it will not delay the hearing of the appeal. It has attached a draft factum which sets out the limited submissions it intends to file on the appeal. There is no evidence of any prejudice to any party. Further, it does not appear that the respondent, Mr. Lopez has filed any material or will be an active participant in the appeal. This court routinely hears from tribunals in other administrative contexts and under similar terms and has recognized the value that tribunal intervenors can add to proceedings in this court: see Birani v. Tarion, 2017 ONSC 2503 at paras. 13-14 (Div. Ct.)

[8] The LAT seeks leave to file a factum not exceeding 15 pages, excluding schedules, and present oral argument for up to 15 minutes, or such time as is permitted by the Court. It does not seek to adduce evidence, raise any new issues, and it will abide by any court directions with respect to the timing for the exchange of materials, subject to any extensions that may be granted.

[9] As this court noted in Cusimano v Toronto (City of) 2011 ONSC 4768 at para. 10, this Court endorsed allowing intervention where the proposed intervenor's contribution will be useful to the court, by offering even a slightly different perspective than that of the parties, while not causing an injustice to the parties. I find that the LAT has established that it will over a perspective that is not that of the parties, that its participation will assist the court and that the terms presented are reasonable limits on its participation while balancing the need for "fully informed adjudication."

[10] Accordingly, I grant the LAT has leave to intervene subject to the following terms:

(a) The Licence Appeal Tribunal shall accept the appeal records as filed by the parties and shall not seek to adduce to them;

(b) The Licence Appeal Tribunal may file a factum not exceeding 15 pages in length;

(c) The Licence Appeal Tribunal may make oral submissions of up to 15 minutes in length, or such time as permitted by the panel of the Court hearing the appeal;

(d) The Licence Appeal Tribunal shall not seek costs nor shall costs be awarded against it in the appeal; and

(e) There shall be no costs with respect to this motion.

Leiper J.

Released: January 26, 2024