Tricia Milne

Associate

Tricia is a very detail oriented, inquisitive, and experienced litigator known for her ability to devise practical solutions to difficult problems.

Biography

Tricia maintains a busy practice focused on commercial litigation and insurance law. In this context, Tricia pursues legal remedies in the context of civil fraud, conspiracy and conversion claims. Her collaborative approach coupled with her excellent analytical abilities, skill in working with witnesses, the police, investigative organizations and Crown Counsel have contributed to many successful results in both judge and jury trials and to negotiated settlements. She has also acted as defence counsel in coverage claims involving allegations of theft and fraud.

Tricia obtained her Bachelor of Arts degree in Communication from Simon Fraser University and thereafter worked in Vancouver in forestry consulting as an editor and project administrator. In 1999 she moved to Edmonton to attend law school at the University of Alberta and received her LL.B. in 2002. Tricia articled with Alberta Justice in Calgary gaining experience in all facets of criminal law, as well as family and civil law, and was called to the Alberta bar in 2003.

Tricia began her litigation career in Calgary as a Crown Prosecutor, prosecuting a wide range of criminal and regulatory offences in both the Provincial Court and the Court of Queen’s Bench. In 2006, she moved back to British Columbia, where she was born and raised. She was called to the British Columbia Bar in September 2006 and honed her civil litigation skills at a regional Vancouver law firm.

Assistance Team
Paralegal

Monika Vaneckova

Paralegal

604-895-2926

[email protected] Contact by email
Expertise
Education
  • University of Alberta, LL.B., 2002

  • Simon Fraser University, B.A.,1994

Bar Admission
  • British Columbia, 2006
  • Alberta, 2003
Languages spoken
  • English
Experience
Representative cases include:
  • High profile prosecution on behalf of ICBC to recover damages caused by Stanley Cup rioters: ICBC v. Stanley Cup Rioters, 2016 BCSC 1108.

  • Fraud recovery on behalf of BC Hydro and Power Authority. Acted as second counsel in jury trial that resulted in recoupment of special damages and $200,000 award of punitive damages: BC Hydro and Power Authority v. Heathcote, unreported (July 9, 2015).

  • Large-scale, multi-action, fraud recovery on behalf of ICBC involving claims of conspiracy and conversion that resulted in significant damage awards against almost 100 defendants: ICBC v. Ben-Jafaar, 2011 BCSC 1106; ICBC v. Atwal, 2010 BCSC 338.

  • Defence of insurance coverage claims involving allegations of fraud: ICBC v. Singh, 2017 BCSC 967; Singh v. ICBC, 2014 BCSC 797; 0724969 BC Ltd. v. ICBC, 2010 BCSC 662.

  • Successfully prosecuted accused for aggravated assault involving life-threatening stab wound: R. v. Bazinet, unreported (January 18, 2005), Calgary, Court of Queen’s Bench; R. v. Bazinet, 2005 CarswellAlta 2112 (ABQB), varied 2005 ABCA 388. (Alberta Justice)

  • Participated as Crown counsel, second chair, on high profile prosecution of egregious aggravated assault of homeless, First Nations person: v. Hilderman, 2004 ABQB 864, and R. v. Hilderman, 2005 ABQB 106. (Alberta Justice)

Professional Credentials
Leadership
  • Life in Law, Guest Blogger
Memberships
  • Canadian Bar Association, Member: BC Branch
  • The Law Society of Alberta, Member
  • The Law Society of British Columbia, Member

Recognitions

Recognized as a “Leading Lawyer” in the area of Family Law by Best Lawyers Canada®

2026

Recognized as a “Leading Lawyer” in the area of Insurance Law by Best Lawyers Canada®

2026

Get in touch with

Tricia Milne

The Latest

Court refuses to dismiss action for coverage brought by mortgagees not named in homeowners’ policy.
Court refuses to dismiss action for coverage brought by mortgagees not named in homeowners’ policy. Court refuses to dismiss action for coverage brought by mortgagees not named in homeowners’ policy. Court refuses to dismiss action for coverage brought by mortgagees not named in homeowners’ policy.
Court finds insured owner and driver of motor vehicle that killed child were underinsured within the meaning of the OPCF 44R Family Protection Coverage as personal liability umbrella policy which included a standard excess policy form (SPF 7) was not a motor vehicle liability policy within the meaning of s. 1 of the Insurance Act or s. 4 of the OPCF 44R.
Court finds insured owner and driver of motor vehicle that killed child were underinsured within the meaning of the OPCF 44R Family Protection Coverage as personal liability umbrella policy which included a standard excess policy form (SPF 7) was not a motor vehicle liability policy within the meaning of s. 1 of the Insurance Act or s. 4 of the OPCF 44R. Court finds insured owner and driver of motor vehicle that killed child were underinsured within the meaning of the OPCF 44R Family Protection Coverage as personal liability umbrella policy which included a standard excess policy form (SPF 7) was not a motor vehicle liability policy within the meaning of s. 1 of the Insurance Act or s. 4 of the OPCF 44R. Court finds insured owner and driver of motor vehicle that killed child were underinsured within the meaning of the OPCF 44R Family Protection Coverage as personal liability umbrella policy which included a standard excess policy form (SPF 7) was not a motor vehicle liability policy within the meaning of s. 1 of the Insurance Act or s. 4 of the OPCF 44R.
Ten Harper Grey Insurance Law Lawyers recognized by Best Lawyers Canada® 2026
Ten Harper Grey Insurance Law Lawyers recognized by Best Lawyers Canada® 2026
Three Harper Grey Family Law Lawyers recognized by Best Lawyers Canada® 2026
Three Harper Grey Family Law Lawyers recognized by Best Lawyers Canada® 2026
Harper Grey receives 80 rankings from Best Lawyers Canada 2026
Harper Grey receives 80 rankings from Best Lawyers Canada 2026
Court finds insured not entitled to liability coverage under homeowner’s policy in circumstances where insured’s criminal negligence caused fire that resulted in injury to third party as policy excluded coverage for criminal acts, whether intentional or not
Court finds insured not entitled to liability coverage under homeowner’s policy in circumstances where insured’s criminal negligence caused fire that resulted in injury to third party as policy excluded coverage for criminal acts, whether intentional or not Court finds insured not entitled to liability coverage under homeowner’s policy in circumstances where insured’s criminal negligence caused fire that resulted in injury to third party as policy excluded coverage for criminal acts, whether intentional or not Court finds insured not entitled to liability coverage under homeowner’s policy in circumstances where insured’s criminal negligence caused fire that resulted in injury to third party as policy excluded coverage for criminal acts, whether intentional or not
Court finds that structural damage at property was caused by settlement over time, culminating in sudden event, rather than sinkhole or subsidence, such that exclusion in Policy applied to oust coverage
Court finds that structural damage at property was caused by settlement over time, culminating in sudden event, rather than sinkhole or subsidence, such that exclusion in Policy applied to oust coverage Court finds that structural damage at property was caused by settlement over time, culminating in sudden event, rather than sinkhole or subsidence, such that exclusion in Policy applied to oust coverage Court finds that structural damage at property was caused by settlement over time, culminating in sudden event, rather than sinkhole or subsidence, such that exclusion in Policy applied to oust coverage
Court of Appeal finds insurer has duty to defend insured in claim arising from leak of liquid chlorine from its premises despite pollution liability exclusion
Court of Appeal finds insurer has duty to defend insured in claim arising from leak of liquid chlorine from its premises despite pollution liability exclusion Court of Appeal finds insurer has duty to defend insured in claim arising from leak of liquid chlorine from its premises despite pollution liability exclusion Court of Appeal finds insurer has duty to defend insured in claim arising from leak of liquid chlorine from its premises despite pollution liability exclusion
Court of Appeal upholds $1.5M punitive damages award against disability insurer for bad faith as well as trial judge’s order of full indemnity costs to insured
Court of Appeal upholds $1.5M punitive damages award against disability insurer for bad faith as well as trial judge’s order of full indemnity costs to insured Court of Appeal upholds $1.5M punitive damages award against disability insurer for bad faith as well as trial judge’s order of full indemnity costs to insured
Court paves path for pro rata distribution in insurance dispute with several claimants
Court paves path for pro rata distribution in insurance dispute with several claimants Court paves path for pro rata distribution in insurance dispute with several claimants
The words “within your dwelling” in an insurance policy are not synonymous with “inside your dwelling”
The words “within your dwelling” in an insurance policy are not synonymous with “inside your dwelling” The words “within your dwelling” in an insurance policy are not synonymous with “inside your dwelling”
Alberta Court of Appeal finds that the words “the Mortgagee” in standard mortgage clause in homeowner’s policy, while ambiguous, do not mean the actual mortgagee in circumstances where the insurer was misled about the actual lender and had no knowledge of same
Alberta Court of Appeal finds that the words “the Mortgagee” in standard mortgage clause in homeowner’s policy, while ambiguous, do not mean the actual mortgagee in circumstances where the insurer was misled about the actual lender and had no knowledge of same Alberta Court of Appeal finds that the words “the Mortgagee” in standard mortgage clause in homeowner’s policy, while ambiguous, do not mean the actual mortgagee in circumstances where the insurer was misled about the actual lender and had no knowledge of same
Limitation period in SEF Family Protection Endorsement does not commence until final judgment or settlement of underlying claim
Limitation period in SEF Family Protection Endorsement does not commence until final judgment or settlement of underlying claim Limitation period in SEF Family Protection Endorsement does not commence until final judgment or settlement of underlying claim
Failure to submit formal application for Long Term Disability under policy amounts to imperfect compliance rather than non-compliance and thus plaintiff’s was entitled to relief from forfeiture
Failure to submit formal application for Long Term Disability under policy amounts to imperfect compliance rather than non-compliance and thus plaintiff’s was entitled to relief from forfeiture Failure to submit formal application for Long Term Disability under policy amounts to imperfect compliance rather than non-compliance and thus plaintiff’s was entitled to relief from forfeiture
Insurer’s statutory right to an examination under oath authorizes an insurer to obtain information relevant to assessing its contractual obligations; it is not intended to permit insurers to embark on fishing expeditions or “take blind shots in the dark.”
Insurer’s statutory right to an examination under oath authorizes an insurer to obtain information relevant to assessing its contractual obligations; it is not intended to permit insurers to embark on fishing expeditions or “take blind shots in the dark.” Insurer’s statutory right to an examination under oath authorizes an insurer to obtain information relevant to assessing its contractual obligations; it is not intended to permit insurers to embark on fishing expeditions or “take blind shots in the dark.”
arrow icon