The Registrar appealed a License Appeal Tribunal (LAT) decision that imposed conditions on the respondents' motor vehicle salesperson registrations rather than revoking them.
The respondents, principals of a car dealership, had failed to supervise employees who engaged in repeated dishonest conduct.
The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, finding that the LAT erred in principle by failing to ascribe appropriate regulatory responsibility to the respondents for the repeated misconduct and by failing to consider the overall context of the business operations.
The matter was remitted to the LAT for a fresh hearing on remedy before a different adjudicator.
