HEARING FILE NUMBER: 20-03-001
IN THE MATTER OF THE MOTOR DEALER ACT, R.S.B.C. 1996 C.316AND THE BUSINESS PRACTICES AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, S.B.C. 2004, C.2
DATE OF DECISION: November 27, 2020
COMPLAINANT: Susan Birch and Vehicle Sales Authority of BC (the “Authority”)
LGN Enterprises Inc. dba Auto Clearance Centre (Motor Dealer Licence #40660), A&A Auto Sales Ltd. dba Auto Clearance Downtown Hastings (Motor Dealer Licence #40660), Aykut (Alex) Bilgin (Salesperson Licence #201174), Mohammad (George) Lateef (Salesperson Licence #203435) and Dusean David Leblanc (Salesperson Licence #209336, lapsed),
collectively (the “Respondents”)
As a result of a complaint received by a consumer alleging the sale of an unsafe vehicle, the Authority commenced an investigation and on March 9, 2020 issued a Hearing Notice against the Respondents. The Respondents, with the exception of Dusean Leblanc and Mohammad Lateef, hired legal counsel to represent them before the Registrar.
On August 21, 2020 the Registrar issued a letter of direction with deadlines for the parties to file their affidavit evidence as well as outlining the process for cross examination of witnesses.
On September 30, 2020 the Authority filed the Affidavit of Bill Manhas and by October 21, 2020 the Respondents had filed their affidavit evidence. On November 4, 2020 the Authority filed a supplemental Affidavit of Dusean Leblanc which counsel for the Respondents objected to
Counsel for the Respondents objected to the filing of the Authority’s supplemental affidavit on the basis that the Authority was attempting to split their case and that the Authority was required to bring the entirety of their case when they filed their affidavit evidence on September 30, 2020. The Respondents also took issue with the evidence provided in the Affidavit of Bill Manhas which exhibited the Investigation Report of Bill Manhas, as they felt it contained hearsay evidence of Dusean Leblanc.
The Registrar allowed Dusean Leblanc’s affidavit to be admitted. A tribunal has greater flexibility in admitting evidence because of its greater duty to protect the public, so long as its admission is procedurally fair. The extent to which Dusean Leblanc’s affidavit will be relied on, is left for the Registrar to determine based on the evidence’s relevance and reliability and after all the totality of the evidence is before the Registrar.
The Registrar also gave the parties the opportunity to make submissions on Dusean Leblanc’s evidence and allowed the Respondents to file affidavit evidence in response to Dusean Leblanc’s affidavit.
Browne v. Dunn, (1893) 1893 CanLII 65 (FOREP) , 6 R. 67 (H.L.)
Cambie Hotel (Nanaimo) Ltd. v. British Columbia (General Manager, Liquor Control and Licensing Branch) , 2006 BCCA 119 (BC Court of Appeal)
Crown Auto Body and Auto Sales Ltd. v. Motor Vehicle Sales Authority of British Columbia, 2014 BCSC 894 (BC Supreme Court)
Fast Trac Bobcat & Excavating Service v. Riverfront Corporate Centre Ltd., 2008 BCSC 848
Friebel v. Omelchenko, 2014 BCSC
Hamman v. Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, 2020 BCCA 170 (Court of Appeal)
Liedtke-Thompson v. Gignac , 2014 YKCA 2
Mayer v Mayer, 2012 BCCA 77 at paras 78–83
Nagy v. BCAA Insurance Corporation, 2019 BCSC 930
Nagy v. BCAA Insurance Corporation, 2020 BCCA 270 (Court of Appeal)
R. v. Ali , 2009 BCCA 464
R. v. Cormier, 2012 NBCA 76
R. v. Drygden, 2013 BCCA 253
R. v. Giroux (2006), 2006 CanLII 10736 (ON CA), 207 C.C.C. (3d) 512
R. v. Henderson (1999), 1999 CanLII 2358 (ON CA), 134 C.C.C. (3d) 131 at 141 (Ont. C.A.)
R. v. Khan, 1990 CanLII 77 (SCC),  2 SCR 531
R. v. Lyttle , 2004 SCC 5
R. v. Quanash, 2015 ONCA 237
R. v. Verney (1993), 1993 CanLII 14688 (ON CA), 87 C.C.C. (3d) 363 at 376 (Ont. C.A.).
Trillium Motor World Ltd. v. Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP , 2017 ONCA 544