Randall Barrs

The Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming imposed a monetary penalty on the applicant licensee for allegedly permitting drunkenness and disorderly conduct by three patrons, contrary to s. 45(1) of Regulation 719/90 under the Liquor Licence Act.

On appeal, the Licence Appeal Tribunal found that while some patrons may have been intoxicated or acted disorderly, the Registrar failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the licensee knew or ought to have known of the drunkenness or disorderly conduct in the circumstances.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar to set aside the order of monetary penalty.

The offender was convicted of conspiracy to produce and possess marijuana for the purpose of trafficking, having operated a business that supplied equipment to large-scale marijuana grow operations.

The Crown sought forfeiture of real properties, vehicles, and bank accounts as offence-related property and proceeds of crime, as well as a fine in lieu of forfeiture for unrecovered funds.

The court ordered the forfeiture of the commercial property used for the business, the offender's residence, and several vehicles.

The court also imposed a fine in lieu of forfeiture of $2,809,211.40 for unrecovered proceeds of crime.

The offender was sentenced to 20 months' incarceration.

The applicant appealed a Notice of Proposal from the Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming to review an application for additional licensed areas due to community objections.

At the hearing, the applicant, the City of Toronto, and the objectors reached a settlement agreement on conditions to attach to the liquor licence.

The Tribunal approved the application subject to the agreed-upon conditions, which included capacity limits, noise restrictions, and operational requirements.

The accused, owner of a hydroponics and garden supply store, was charged with conspiracy to produce and possess marihuana for the purpose of trafficking, aiding and abetting those offences, and money laundering.

The Crown alleged the accused operated his store as a 'one-stop shop' to supply marihuana grow operations, using clandestine business practices to protect customers' identities.

The court found the accused guilty of the conspiracy and aiding and abetting charges, concluding he knew and intended that his products and services would facilitate marihuana grow operations.

However, the accused was acquitted of money laundering, as the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the funds used to purchase 'ghost ownership' properties were derived specifically from the production of marihuana rather than unreported store profits.

The applicant appealed an Order of Monetary Penalty issued by the Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming for allegedly permitting drunkenness on its licensed premises, contrary to subsection 45(1) of O. Reg. 719/90.

While the Tribunal found that a patron was intoxicated on the premises, it concluded there was insufficient evidence that the licensee permitted the drunkenness to occur, as the licensee was in the process of dealing with the situation when inspectors arrived.

The appeal was allowed and the monetary penalty was set aside.

The Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming proposed to suspend the Applicant's liquor licence for 14 days for allegedly permitting underage drinking, failing to inspect identification, and permitting drunkenness.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found insufficient evidence that underage persons were served or consumed alcohol on the premises.

However, the Tribunal found that the Applicant permitted drunkenness, as a patron exhibited clear signs of intoxication and vomiting without intervention from staff.

The parties were invited to make written submissions on sanctions.

The accused was charged with refusing to comply with a demand to provide breath samples.

The Crown's case was straightforward: the police had proper grounds to demand samples and the accused verbally refused.

The sole issue was whether the accused, whose first language was Russian, was provided meaningful access to counsel in a comprehensible manner.

The court found that the police took appropriate steps to accommodate the language barrier, including repeating rights, explaining them in plain language, arranging for a Russian-speaking officer, and securing a Russian-speaking duty counsel.

Although the accused claimed confusion about his legal obligations, the court found he understood his choices and their consequences through the translation provided during the breath testing procedure.

The conviction was upheld.

The Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming issued a Notice of Proposal to suspend the applicant's liquor licence for 14 days, alleging that a patron was assaulted by representatives of the licence holder.

Following a hearing, the Tribunal found as a matter of fact that no such assault occurred.

The Tribunal directed the Registrar not to carry out the Notice of Proposal.

The Registrar of Alcohol and Gaming proposed to suspend the applicant's liquor licence for 14 days, alleging that security guards assaulted an intoxicated patron.

The patron and his friends testified that he was beaten by security guards in the staff kitchen and kicked while being thrown out.

The security guards testified that the patron was involved in a fight, bit a guard, and was later kicked by another patron while being restrained.

The Tribunal found the patron and his friends' evidence unreliable due to severe intoxication and accepted the security guards' testimony.

The Tribunal concluded that the patron was not assaulted by representatives of the licence holder and invited submissions on the appropriate sanction.

The offender was convicted after trial of conspiracy to export MDMA and possession of MDMA for the purpose of exportation under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

The evidence established participation as a principal intermediary in a large-scale scheme exporting tens of thousands of ecstasy pills from Canada to the United States.

The court emphasized the scale of the operation, the substantial potential profits, and the need for general deterrence in commercial drug trafficking involving international exportation.

Although the offender had no prior criminal record and had supportive personal circumstances, the court found that only a custodial sentence would be proportionate.

Concurrent six-year penitentiary terms were imposed along with firearms prohibition and DNA orders.

The Registrar of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario issued a Notice of Proposal to refuse the transfer of a liquor licence to the applicant due to an outstanding retail sales tax audit of $57,271.83.

The parties submitted an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission on Disposition.

The Board found that the applicant breached the Liquor Licence Act by failing to remit collected retail sales tax.

The Board ordered that the transfer application be approved on the condition that the applicant remit $5,000 to the Ministry of Revenue and execute a Memorandum of Understanding regarding the outstanding tax.

During a hearing to suspend a liquor licence for allegedly serving intoxicated patrons, the Licensee brought a motion for non-suit after the Registrar's case.

The Board dismissed the non-suit motion.

The Registrar then brought a motion arguing that the Licensee should be deemed to have elected not to call evidence because they did not make a formal election when bringing the non-suit motion.

The Board dismissed the Registrar's motion, finding that administrative tribunals have discretion to control their own processes and that fairness dictated allowing the Licensee to call evidence, especially since the Registrar did not raise the election issue at the time the non-suit motion was made.

The Registrar of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario sought to suspend the liquor licence of Club Frequency Inc. based on multiple alleged violations, including permitting intoxicated patrons, after-hours consumption, and failing to deter disorderly conduct.

The parties submitted an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission on Disposition.

The Board accepted the joint submission, finding the licensee breached the regulations.

The Board ordered a 45-day suspension of the liquor licence and imposed several conditions, including the implementation of a Safety and Security Plan and a Compliance Plan.

The Registrar of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario issued a Notice of Proposal to suspend the liquor licence of Rumours Sports Lounge, alleging violations of subsections 19(1) and 45(2) of Ontario Regulation 719/90.

Police and AGCO inspectors testified that upon entering the premises, they observed rampant and open smoking of marijuana and tobacco, as well as discarded drug paraphernalia.

They also found a bottle of liquor containing fruit flies.

The Licensee denied the extent of the marijuana use and argued that the evidence was exaggerated.

The Board accepted the evidence of the police and inspectors, finding that the Licensee permitted the illegal smoking of marijuana and kept adulterated liquor for sale.

The Board found the Licensee in contravention of the regulations and invited written submissions on penalty.

A pre-hearing tele-conference was held regarding a Notice of Proposal to suspend the liquor licence of Club Frequency Inc. The Board ordered the Licensee to disclose its witness list and summaries to the Registrar 10 days before the hearing.

The Registrar was also ordered to complete any further disclosure 10 days before the hearing, excluding witness statements for civilian witnesses.

Following a finding that the licensee contravened the Liquor Licence Act by failing to supervise its manager, who was found with illegal drugs and cash on the premises, the Board determined the appropriate sanction.

The Board found that the licensee abandoned its responsibility for the management and supervision of the business.

A 21-day suspension of the liquor licence was ordered, inclusive of 7 days already served during an interim suspension, to serve as both a specific and general deterrent.

The licensee appealed an Order of Monetary Penalty issued by the Registrar.

A pre-hearing teleconference was held to schedule the appeal hearing.

The Board ordered both the licensee and the Registrar to provide mutual disclosure, including witness lists and summaries of evidence, at least ten days prior to the scheduled hearing date.

At a pre-hearing conference regarding a Notice of Proposal to suspend a liquor licence, the Board ordered mutual disclosure.

The licensee was ordered to provide a witness list and detailed summaries of witness evidence, and both parties were ordered to complete any further disclosure ten days before the scheduled hearing date.

The Board of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario held a tele-conference pre-hearing regarding a Notice of Proposal to suspend the liquor licence of the respondent.

The Board ordered the respondent to disclose its witness list and evidence summaries to the applicant ten days prior to the scheduled hearing.

The applicant was also ordered to complete any further disclosure by the same deadline.

The Registrar of the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario ordered an interim suspension of the respondent's liquor licence in the interest of public safety.

A hearing was held regarding the rescission of the interim suspension order.

The Board found that lifting the interim suspension subject to conditions would not compromise the public interest.

The interim suspension was rescinded on the conditions that a specific individual be prohibited from associating with the establishment and that the current manager submit a personal history report.