Skip to content

Client Update: Driving high – the future is hazy for Canadian automobile insurers once cannabis goes legal

Vasu Sivapalan and Ben Whitney

Legalized and regulated cannabis is on track to become a reality in Canada in just under a year (on or before July 1, 2018). This will create a number of opportunities as well as challenges for the automobile insurance industry. As discussed in our recent articles The Grass Is Always Greener in the Other Jurisdiction, and Cannabis Act Regulations – Now We Are Really Getting into the Weeds! the Federal and Provincial governments are working diligently to develop a regulatory framework for recreational cannabis, but much is still unknown. Accordingly, the biggest challenge facing automobile insurers at present is the uncertainty legalized cannabis brings.

With Canada becoming only the second country in the world to legalize the possession, production, and sale of cannabis nationwide, information on the impact of legalization on this industry is sparse. This makes it difficult to predict whether legalization will result in an increase in the number of drug-impaired drivers on the road. However, we can consider the results of legalization in certain states, and can look to some existing data for insight.

What the numbers say

A recent study by the Highway Loss Data Institute in the United States has reported an increase in collision frequency of about 3% in states with recreational cannabis – Oregon, Washington, and Colorado – in the years since legalization has taken place. However, the study was not able to definitively link the increased collision frequency with consumption of cannabis. This increase could also be linked to a growth in tourism in these states, or any number of other factors.

In Canada, a recent survey from State Farm suggests that many drivers don’t believe driving high is as bad as drinking and driving. In fact, 27% of those surveyed either did not know or disagreed with the idea that driving high was as bad as driving under the influence of alcohol. Additionally, while almost 9 out of 10 Canadians stated they had never driven under the influence of cannabis, 44% of those who had driven high believed it did not impact their ability to drive safely, and 14% did not know if it affected that ability. Lastly, according to the Canadian Centre for Substance Abuse, it is more prevalent for drivers to drive after cannabis use than after consuming alcohol.

With all of that said, a recent New Brunswick Medical Society report states that driving under the influence of cannabis is already prevalent in rural areas, and has suggested that legalization may not result in any change in the frequency of impaired driving. In the face of such uncertainty, and until legalization occurs and sufficient accident data accumulates, insurers should consider insulating customers from premium hikes.

Problems in measurement & roadside testing

Investigations of drug-impaired driving offences are complex, which means that reliably assessing these offences is a significant challenge for automobile insurers. Unlike alcohol related driving offences- where precise samples may be taken orally and impairment limits have been set by blood-alcohol content- there is little agreement in Canada on what type of sample should be tested or what the per se limit for tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) should be in drug-impaired driving offences.

Experts suggest THC concentration drops rapidly in the blood system and therefore will not always provide an accurate measurement of a driver’s level of impairment. Further scientific research on the impairment effect of alcohol and cannabis when consumed together would be beneficial for evaluating impaired driving offenses.

In Colorado and Washington, drivers suspected of drug-impaired driving are required to provide a blood sample. A driver is considered impaired if she/he has 5 nanograms of active THC in his/her blood sample.

Drug-related driving offences are not new to Canada. Currently, law enforcement uses the evidence from “drug recognition experts” who are police officers trained to recognize impairment in drivers under the influence of drugs. Although subjective in nature, the Supreme Court of Canada recently ruled in R v Bingley, 2017 SCC 12 that the opinion of a drug recognition expert may be admitted as expert evidence at trial without the evidence being first submitted to a voir dire, or preliminary examination of the evidence. This ruling makes it easier for law enforcement to establish evidence of drug-impairment, which is beneficially for automobile insurers when assessing drug-impairment insurance claims. However, insurers should keep in mind that law enforcement does not have the same expertise, nor experience, with detection and prosecution of drug-impaired driving as they do with alcohol-impaired driving.

In Canada, Bill C-46 has been tabled in Parliament to amend the Criminal Code (and other acts) and create a framework for dealing with these issues. This bill has passed its second reading in Parliament and has been referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. This act will create new criminal offences for driving with a “blood drug concentration” higher than one prescribed in the regulations, and will authorize law enforcement officials to demand a sample of a bodily substance for analysis by approved drug screening equipment. The particular details will be found in the regulations when they are drafted, but it appears that for the time being, Canada will be taking an approach similar to that of Colorado and Washington.

The path forward

To prepare for the impending legalization of cannabis, automobile insurers should establish a clear framework for handling matters involving cannabis related offences. Insurers should consider/continue using alcohol as a template for cannabis use by treating the use of prescribed cannabis as any other prescription medication, and by applying the same consequences of alcohol impaired driving on cannabis impaired driving. For example, in Ontario, drivers impaired by cannabis use will face the same fines and license suspensions as drivers impaired by alcohol.

While the future remains uncertain, it seems quite likely that recreational cannabis will soon be legal across Canada. Only time will tell the true impact of cannabis legalization on the automobile insurance industry, but insurers would be wise to consider potential impacts today.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Charter-ing a Different Course? Two decisions on TWU’s proposed law school

August 11, 2016

Jennifer Taylor Introduction Appeal courts in Ontario1 and Nova Scotia2 have now issued decisions about Trinity Western University’s proposed law school (“TWU”) in British Columbia, and at first glance they couldn’t be more different. The Court of Appeal for…

Read More

Restart the Clock!: Confirmation and resetting limitation periods in Tuck v. Supreme Holdings, 2016 NLCA 40

August 11, 2016

Joe Thorne1 and Giles Ayers2 Limitation periods serve a critical function in the civil justice system. They promote the timely resolution of litigation on the basis of reliable evidence, and permit litigants to assess their legal exposure…

Read More

Client Update: SCC issues major decision affecting federal employers: Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

July 15, 2016

On July 14, 2016 the Supreme Court of Canada issued a significant decision affecting federally regulated employers across Canada. In Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited the Court held that the purpose of the unjust dismissal…

Read More

Client Update: Requirement to register as a mortgage brokerage and mortgage administrator in New Brunswick

July 7, 2016

On April 1, 2016 New Brunswick’s Mortgage Brokers Act came into force, requiring businesses acting as mortgage brokerages or as mortgage administrators in New Brunswick to be licensed. A mortgage brokerage is a business that on behalf…

Read More

Copyright does not monopolize facts – documentary filmmakers’ claim against book author and publisher fails

June 29, 2016

In May 2016, the Federal Court of Canada confirmed that copyright does not protect facts, even where a book’s author is clearly inspired by the content of a film (Maltz v. Witterick, 2016 FC 524 (CanLII)).…

Read More

Solicitor-client privilege vs the Canada Revenue Agency: the SCC speaks

June 10, 2016

By Jennifer Taylor “…firms of notaries or lawyers…must not be turned into archives for the tax authorities”1 So says the Supreme Court of Canada in one of two highly anticipated decisions on solicitor-client privilege, offering lawyers…

Read More

Why can’t we be friends?: Lessons on corporate dissolution from Smith v. Hillier

May 30, 2016

Joe Thorne1 and Clara Linegar2 As joint owners of a business, what do you do when the business relationship falls apart? And what if one owner undermines the business in the process? In Smith v Hillier,3 Justice Paquette…

Read More

Client Update: Supreme Court of Canada dismisses appeals in punitive damages cases

May 26, 2016

The Supreme Court of Canada has dismissed the appeals in Bruce Brine v. Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services Inc.1 (with costs) and Luciano Branco, et al. v. Zurich Life Insurance Company Limited, et al.(without costs). Both of…

Read More

Client Update: Pension update: Countdown to Nova Scotia Pooled Registered Pension Plans

May 17, 2016

On May 4, 2016, the Nova Scotia Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act (“PRPP Act”) was proclaimed in force, and finalized Pooled Registered Pension Plan Regulations were released. While there were no major changes from the previously released draft regulations, the proposed rules…

Read More

Pension Primer: Pooled Registered Pension Plans (“PRPPs”) in Nova Scotia

April 22, 2016

By Level Chan and Dante Manna Pooled Registered Pension Plans (“PRPPs”) are closer to becoming a reality for Nova Scotian employers. PRPPs were established by the Federal government in an effort to address the lack of retirement savings…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top