Coverage connected to British Columbia, with verified short holdings, original analysis and links to the underlying sources. A publication date isn't the same as a decision date. The dates below identify which is shown.
46 verified publications. Showing the 36 most recent.
The BC Supreme Court preserved a civil jury’s $103,000 personal injury damages award, holding that a $1,056.78 upward rounding adjustment was a procedural irregularity rather than an invalid verdict. The court directed the final order to reflect the adjustment while an appeal of the jury verdict remained outstanding.
The BC Supreme Court set aside the dismissal of a restaurant patron’s battery claim after finding that the trial judge misapplied the legal test for consent and self-defence. It ordered a new trial without deciding whether the restaurant was liable for its employee’s conduct.
The BC Supreme Court dismissed a truck fire product liability action because the truck, components and records had been destroyed, creating a substantial risk that a fair trial was impossible. It declined to find spoliation because the evidence did not establish that the items were destroyed to affect the litigation.
The BC Supreme Court distinguished accident-related injuries from the risks posed by a pedestrian’s pre-existing spinal condition and awarded $702,964 following an admitted-liability motor vehicle collision. Its assessment applied thin-skull and crumbling-skull principles to the evidence, without deciding any insurance coverage issue.
The tribunal reasonably applied the statutory employment and disability requirements to the record. The Court upheld the tribunal decision and dismissed the petition.
The reasonable efforts requirement is contextual. On a severed liability determination, the Court found the defendants liable and held that the plaintiff had made all reasonable efforts required by section 24 of the Insurance (Vehicle) Act.
There was a sufficient fair issue to be tried concerning breach of trust and fiduciary obligations over premium funds. The Court lifted the stay so the insurers could commence and continue their proposed action against Stratford.
The existence of the dealership’s garage policy did not itself establish liability coverage for this Jeep in these circumstances. The Court held that the Jeep was not insured for operation on a highway under the applicable 2018 statutory and regulatory scheme and dismissed the dealership’s petition for indemnity.
The requested discovery was relevant to live issues including what occurred when coverage was placed, when a plausible broker negligence claim became discoverable, and damages. The Court granted the broker’s document production and further discovery applications, with costs in the cause.
Broker negligence required proof both of a breach of the broker’s duty and compensable loss caused by the absence of suitable coverage. The Court dismissed the claim against the broker.
A decision refusing to set aside default could not stand where its central conclusion rested on a material misunderstanding of evidence about which vehicle the messages concerned and whether the producer had accepted responsibility. The Supreme Court granted judicial review.
An insurer controlling the defence owes good faith and must give the insured’s interests at least equal consideration where policy limits create personal exposure. The Court found breaches of duty by ICBC, defence counsel and independent counsel and assessed a 15% lost chance to avoid or reduce the insured’s loss.
The statutory reasonable efforts inquiry is holistic and fact specific. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, held that all reasonable efforts had been made in the circumstances, and remitted the matter to the trial court for assessment of damages.
The Court deferred to the chambers judge’s discretionary conclusion that the case was not suitable for summary determination. The Court of Appeal dismissed both appeals from the refusal to summarily dismiss the action.
On a post limitation pleading amendment, the overriding question is what is just and convenient. The Court allowed the amendments.
The words in historic correspondence had to be read against the commercial context, including the ability of an MGA to withhold a book transfer. The appellate court upheld the interpretation that release and transfer of the book was not a relinquishment of agency servicing fees.
British Columbia's statutory condition on material change in risk requires prompt written notice of a change that is material and within the insured's knowledge and control. The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.
A driver blamed an unsafe lane change for a 3 vehicle collision, but BC's Civil Resolution Tribunal found he had time to rebuild a safe following distance. ICBC's finding that he was 100% responsible stood, even though the other driver technically broke a lane change rule.
A claimant failed to recover $5,000 in alleged lost wages from ICBC after a lengthy vehicle repair. The Tribunal found no proven unreasonable handling of the claim and, independently, no evidence that the delays caused her to lose employment.
A driver successfully challenged ICBC's revised finding of complete fault in a three vehicle collision. The Tribunal allocated 75% of responsibility to another driver and ordered ICBC to reimburse $375 of his deductible, but not a $3,000 engineering report.
ICBC's finding that a driver was 100% responsible for a winter collision survived a fresh Tribunal assessment. The driver had entered a highway in the face of an immediate hazard and failed to prove the approaching driver contributed to the crash.
The Tribunal upheld ICBC's assignment of 100% responsibility after a scooter was moved into a parked car. Early statements and photographs supported the damage assessment, and an insurer's estimator was treated as a business witness rather than an independent expert.
A driver blamed an unsafe lane change for a 3 vehicle collision, but BC's Civil Resolution Tribunal found he had time to rebuild a safe following distance. ICBC's finding that he was 100% responsible stood, even though the other driver technically broke a lane change rule.
The Supreme Court held that Commonwealth had no duty to defend Suncor's claims against an engineering contractor and its parent. A turnkey exclusion captured the design and construction project alleged, despite the pleading of separate duties to warn and supervise.
A BC court assessed almost $646,000 in damages after a lengthy collision injury trial. The decision deals with expert evidence, earning capacity and future care, not an insurer's entitlement to deny coverage.
The BC Court of Appeal dismissed a consultant’s attempt to use a construction contract waiver to defeat Fraser Health’s negligence claim. The waiver protected firms engaged directly by the design builder, not the lower tier consultant who relied on it.
A BC tribunal dismissed a long term disability claimant's discrimination complaint after finding the plan administrator had reasonably adapted its evidence requests. The decision distinguishes a legitimate need to verify continuing entitlement from an inflexible claims process that can adversely affect someone with a mental disability.
The Supreme Court held that Lombard owed a duty to defend the contractor against water-damage claims. The pleadings disclosed a possibility of covered property damage, and the successive policy exclusions didn't eliminate it.
British Columbia's Court of Appeal upheld the refusal to dismiss Fraser Health's claim against Tru-Line under a construction contract waiver. In this contract, the waiver covered consultants directly retained by the design builder.
A new BC decision separates an insurance valuation dispute from the narrower question of whether its statutory appraisal process was unfair or patently unreasonable.
The BC Supreme Court set aside a procedural defeat for an insurance agency after finding the lower court misunderstood evidence about a promised Range Rover renewal.
A BC court found the claimant did enough to identify the unknown vehicle after a no contact crash, allowing the statutory claim against ICBC to continue.
The court found serious failures in protecting an insured exposed above his policy limit, but limitation rules defeated the claims against ICBC and defence counsel.
The insured says he would have bought more underinsured motorist protection if his broker had properly advised him. The court ordered broader discovery but did not decide negligence.
The court upheld a CRT decision denying ICBC income replacement benefits and refused to let the claimant rebuild the evidentiary record on judicial review.
The BC Court of Appeal restored a claim against ICBC after finding the injured claimants had done what was reasonable to identify the unknown driver in the circumstances.
See how a weekly briefing brings relevant developments together. Choose your divisions and jurisdictions before deciding whether membership is useful for you.
A preview doesn't enroll you in email. Optional delivery requires a separate choice.