Background:

• License Revocation: Wesley Moore operated St. Jacobs Country Living without a proper license after his ex-wife's license was revoked due to breaches including resident abuse.
• Rebranding: Moore rebranded the home to claim it was not a "retirement home."

Legal Arguments:

1. Definition Dispute: Appellants argued St. Jacobs Country Living did not meet the definition of a "retirement home" under the Retirement Homes Act, 2010.
   • Occupancy: The home housed more than six elderly, unrelated persons.
   • Care Services: Appellants contested that their assistance with medication was not "administration of a drug."
2. Application Judge's Errors Alleged:
   • Residential Complex Definition: Appellants claimed one resident (R.W.) lived separately and should not count towards the care services requirement.
   • Care Services Interpretation: They argued that assistance with medication did not constitute "administration of a drug."

Court’s Findings:

• Residential Complex: The court upheld that R.W. was a resident of the same complex, as care services were unified.
• Care Services: The court confirmed activities like storing, reminding, and handing out medication qualify as "administration of a drug."

Additional Arguments:

• Charter Rights and Abuse of Process: Dismissed as irrelevant.
• Scope of Orders: The court upheld that judges have broad authority under s. 96.1 of the Act.

Decision:

• Appeal Dismissed: The appeal was dismissed.
• Costs: Appellants to pay $25,000 in costs.

Key Points:

• Operating an unlicensed retirement home and rebranding to avoid compliance was unlawful.
• "Care services" under the Act includes assistance with medication.
• Courts can impose orders to ensure compliance.