In this ICBC pedestrian accident case(Schuk v. York Fire & Casualty Insurance Company) the injury claimant was struck by a highway tractor trailer on Highway 16 near Valemont, B.C. and filed a Vancouver personal injury lawsuit. The tractor trailer was licensed in Manitoba and the pedestrian injury claimant had a B.C. driver’s license. The court earlier concluded that the claimant was entitled to payment of no-fault accident benefits from ICBC and Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation, with MPIC being the primary insurer.
On this court application, the Vancouver personal injury lawyer for the claimant argues that she is entitled to the unlimited benefits provided under the Manitoba Public Insurance scheme. The limit of accident benefits in B.C. is $150,000 under Part 7 of the Regulations, whereas there is no limit under the MPIC legislation.
ICBC did not appear on this application, only the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation appeared. MPIC took the position that the claimant is not entitled to no-fault benefits under the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Act.
The real issue was the interpretation of the Power of Attorney and Undertaking filed by the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation. The court found that the undertaking provides that MPIC will satisfy any final judgment rendered against it “in respect of any kind or class of coverage provided under the contract or plan”, and “in respect of any kind or class of coverage required by law to be provided under a plan” in British Columbia. Judge B.J. Brown accepted the submissions of Manitoba Public Insurance that drivers who were not Manitoba residents and not injured in Manitoba are not entitle to benefits under the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Act. The injury claimant’s court application was dismissed. Posted by Mr. Renn A. Holness
