Harding v. Skopyk

• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Judge: Laing, J.
• Citation: (2014), 443 Sask.R. 34 (QB),2014 SKQB 228
• Date: 25 July 2014

Harding v. Skopyk (2014), 443 Sask.R. 34 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2014] Sask.R. TBEd. AU.041

Kara Harding (plaintiff) v. Saskatchewan Government Insurance and Kiel Skopyk (defendants)

(2007 Q.B.G. No. 916; 2014 SKQB 228)

Indexed As: Harding v. Skopyk

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Saskatoon

Laing, J.

July 25, 2014.

Summary:

An impaired driver drove his vehicle over the plaintiff's foot, injuring it, while she was employed as a security guard. The plaintiff received Workers' Compensation Board (WCB) wage loss benefits and a WCB permanent functional impairment benefit. The plaintiff commenced an action, seeking past and future economic loss under s. 103 of the Automobile Accident Insurance Act (AAIA) and non-economic loss under s. 104. Saskatchewan Government Insurance asserted that s. 202(2) of the AAIA barred the claim as it stated that no benefits were payable to a person who was entitled to other compensation, including WCB benefits. On a joint application, the parties asked the court to answer a number of questions regarding ss. 103, 104 and 202.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench answered the questions accordingly.

Editor's Note: This decision was released with a companion decision. See (2014), 443 Sask.R. 50. For the decision allowing the plaintiff's application for a jury trial, see (2014), 443 Sask.R. 26.

Damages - Topic 257

Bars - General - Availability of insurance benefits - [See Insurance - Topic 5010.1 and second Insurance - Topic 5010.2 ].

Insurance - Topic 5010.1

Automobile insurance - Compulsory government schemes - General - Limitation on causes of action - General - An impaired driver drove his vehicle over the plaintiff's foot, injuring it, while she was employed as a security guard - The plaintiff received Workers' Compensation Board (WCB) wage loss benefits and a WCB permanent functional impairment benefit - The plaintiff commenced an action, seeking past and future economic loss under s. 103 of the Automobile Accident Insurance Act (AAIA) and non-economic loss under s. 104 - Saskatchewan Government Insurance asserted that s. 202(2) of the AAIA barred the claim as it stated that no benefits were payable to a person who was entitled to other compensation, including WCB benefits - On a joint application by the parties, the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench discussed the interpretation of ss, 103, 104 and 202, stating that "one of the main objects of the AAIA is compensation of persons injured in motor vehicle accidents in Saskatchewan. The objects are met by providing no fault benefits, and providing a right of action in s. 103 for economic loss as specified therein over and above the no fault benefits payable, and a right of action for non-economic loss limited to persons injured by persons who are convicted of certain Criminal Code offences. Section 202(2) requires that those persons qualified for [WCB] payments must access the no fault benefits payable pursuant to that legislation. Sections 202(3), 103 and 104 seek to ensure that a person required to access [WCB] is not penalized for having to do so relative to the balance of the population." - See paragraphs 29 to 32.

Insurance - Topic 5010.2

Automobile insurance - Compulsory government schemes (incl. no-fault schemes) - Limitation on causes of action - Exceptions - [See both Insurance - Topic 5070 ].

Insurance - Topic 5010.2

Automobile insurance - Compulsory government schemes (incl. no-fault schemes) - Limitation on causes of action - Exceptions - An impaired driver drove his vehicle over the plaintiff's foot, injuring it, while she was employed as a security guard - The plaintiff received Workers' Compensation Board (WCB) wage loss benefits and a WCB permanent functional impairment benefit - The plaintiff commenced an action, seeking past and future economic loss under s. 103 of the Automobile Accident Insurance Act (AAIA) and non-economic loss under s. 104 - Saskatchewan Government Insurance asserted that s. 202(2) of the AAIA barred the claim as it stated that no benefits were payable to a person who was entitled to other compensation, including WCB benefits - On a joint application by the parties, the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench discussed s. 104, "Tort actions for non-economic loss" - Section 104 provided a right of action for non-economic loss in the event the operator of the vehicle who caused the loss was convicted of, among other things, impaired driving - However, any such payout was not a benefit under the AAIA - It was a payment of compensation for non-economic loss as determined by the tort system - Section 202(2) did not preclude the plaintiff from seeking damages under s. 104 - See paragraphs 27, 28 and 33.

Insurance - Topic 5070

Automobile insurance - Compulsory government schemes - Bodily injury and death benefits - Bars - An impaired driver drove his vehicle over the plaintiff's foot, injuring it, while she was employed as a security guard - The plaintiff received Workers' Compensation Board (WCB) wage loss benefits and a WCB permanent functional impairment benefit - She also received a WCB permanent functional impairment benefit of $2,260 - The plaintiff commenced an action, seeking past and future economic loss under s. 103 of the Automobile Accident Insurance Act (AAIA) and non-economic loss under s. 104 - Saskatchewan Government Insurance asserted that s. 202(2) of the AAIA barred the claim as it stated that no benefits were payable to a person who was entitled to other compensation, including WCB benefits - On a joint application by the parties, the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench discussed the effect of s. 202, which was a mechanism to avoid double recovery - In 2002, s. 202(3) was added by amendment, providing that a person who received other compensation, including WCB benefits, could claim any loss of income over and above the amount of other compensation received up to the maximum yearly insurable earnings set out in s. 136 of the AAIA - No benefits were payable to a person who was entitled to other compensation, other than the benefit set out in s. 202(3) - See paragraphs 19 to 24.

Insurance - Topic 5070

Automobile insurance - Compulsory government schemes - Bodily injury and death benefits - Bars - An impaired driver drove his vehicle over the plaintiff's foot, injuring it, while she was employed as a security guard - The plaintiff received Workers' Compensation Board (WCB) wage loss benefits and a WCB permanent functional impairment benefit - The plaintiff commenced an action, seeking past and future economic loss under s. 103 of the Automobile Accident Insurance Act (AAIA) and non-economic loss under s. 104 - Saskatchewan Government Insurance asserted that s. 202(2) of the AAIA barred the claim as it stated that no benefits were payable to a person who was entitled to other compensation, including WCB benefits - On a joint application by the parties, the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench discussed s. 103, "Tort actions for economic loss" - Section 103 did not provide a benefit under the AAIA, but identified the action that could be brought by a person receiving WCB benefits - No money was payable as a benefit under s. 103 - Section 202(2) did not preclude the plaintiff from seeking damages under s. 103 - However, s. 202(3), under which a person who received other compensation, including WCB benefits, could claim any loss of income over and above the amount of other compensation received up to the maximum yearly insurable earnings set out in s. 136 of the AAIA, did apply to the plaintiff - Section 202(3) was a "stand alone" benefit for persons such as the plaintiff - See paragraphs 25, 26 and 33.

Words and Phrases

Entitled - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench considered the interpretation of the word "entitled" as found in ss. 103, 104 and 202 of the Automobile Accident Insurance Act, R.S.S. 1978, c. A-35 - See paragraphs 15 to 18.

Cases Noticed:

Acton v. Britannia No. 502 (Rural Municipality) et al. (2012), 405 Sask.R. 180; 563 W.A.C. 180; 2012 SKCA 127, refd to. [para. 10].

Marsh v. Gates (1996), 151 Sask.R. 4 (Q.B.), appld. [para. 17].

Sickel v. Gordy et al. (2001), 204 Sask.R. 60; 2001 SKQB 79, refd to. [para. 20].

Moen v. Sandras et al. (2004), 248 Sask.R. 99; 2004 SKQB 181, refd to. [para. 20].

Lehrer v. Saskatchewan Government Insurance (2002), 215 Sask.R. 83; 2002 SKQB 3, appld. [para. 21].

Statutes Noticed:

Automobile Accident Insurance Act, R.S.S. 1978, c. A-35, sect. 103 [para. 25]; sect. 104 [para. 27]; sect. 202(3) [para. 19].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Driedger, Elmer A., and Sullivan, Ruth, Sullivan and Driedger on the Construction of Statutes (4th Ed. 2002), pp. 163 [para. 13]; 262, 263 [para. 11].

Counsel:

Jonathon S. Abrametz, for the plaintiff;

Dale W. Brown, for the defendant.

This application was heard by Laing, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Saskatoon, who delivered the following fiat on July 25, 2014.