Published In: Insurance Law Newsletter – 12.Jun.18 June 12, 2018

Case Summary: The insured sought coverage under his Ontario automobile insurance policy following an accident on an uninsured ATV in British Columbia. The ATV was not covered by the policy because the ATV was not an “automobile” under the Ontario policy.

Insurance law – Automobile insurance – Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule – Automobile – definition – Interprovincial issues – Practice – Appeals – Standard of review

Benson v. Belair Insurance Co., [2018] O.J. No. 1883, 2018 ONSC 2297, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, April 9, 2018, G.B. Morawetz R.S.J., J.A. Thorburn and E.R. Tzimas JJ.

The insured was a passenger on an ATV in British Columbia when he fell off the ATV. The ATV was owned by a resident of British Columbia and the owner was not required and did not insure his ATV. The insured held a standard Ontario automobile insurance policy and applied for coverage. The policy did not list an ATV as an insured vehicle. The Financial Services Commission of Ontario held that the insured was not involved in an automobile accident covered by the policy because the ATV was not an “automobile”. The Ontario Insurance Act defines “automobile” as a “motor vehicle required under any Act to be insured under a motor vehicle liability policy.” The Court held that the British Columbia legislation which did not require the ATV to be insured applied and therefore the ATV was not an “automobile” and the insured was not entitled to coverage.

This case was digested by Dionne H. Liu, and first published in the LexisNexis® Harper Grey Administrative Law Netletter and the Harper Grey Administrative Law Newsletter.  If you would like to discuss this case further, please contact Dionne H. Liu at dliu@harpergrey.com.