Motor vehicle insurance compensation for personal injuries is limited to injuries that arise from ownership, or the use or operation of a motor vehicle. In most situations, this is very easy to establish. However, there are situations where the injuries may have a different cause entirely that serves as an intervening act, disconnecting the vehicle from the individual's ultimate injury. This is very common on situations relating to an assault that is somehow connected to an insured motor vehicle. The law regarding these situations is governed by the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Herbison v. Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Co. ("Herbison") 2007 SCC 47. In Herbison, the insured mistook the plaintiff for a deer while hunting; he was shooting while outside his vehicle. The insured was using his truck headlights to hunt. The Supreme Court determined that the injuries were not covered by the automobile policy. The Supreme Court found that the shooting was an independent, separate and intervening act that broke the chain of causation. It was also held that the use of the term "directly or indirectly" in the Insurance Act did not remove the requirement of an unbroken chain of causation. It was insufficient to find that the use or operation of the insured's motor vehicle "in some manner contributed to or added to the injury." The Supreme Court of Canada stated that the purpose test is to be restated to ask, "did the accident occur in the course of the ordinary and the normal...
Read Full Story: https://www.mondaq.com/canada/personal-injury/1106574/when-does-auto-insurance-cover-injuries-related-to-the-use-and-operation-of-a-motor-vehicle-and-when-does-it-not
Your content is great. However, if any of the content contained herein violates any rights of yours, including those of copyright, please contact us immediately by e-mail at media[@]kissrpr.com.