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


 
 

Client Update: Universal interest arbitration proposed for New Brunswick

April 5, 2016

On March 29, 2016, the Province of New Brunswick tabled proposed changes to the Industrial Relations Act and the Public Services Labour Relations Act. If passed, these changes would dramatically alter well-established principles of private sector collective bargaining.…

Read More

Good Faith Fisheries: New case on Crown consultation & regulation of Aboriginal fisheries

March 22, 2016

By Jennifer Taylor Why is this case a big deal? It started with two salmon. Now, after several years of litigation, the Nova Scotia Provincial Court in R v Martin, 2016 NSPC 14 has stayed proceedings against…

Read More

Atlantic Employers’ Counsel – Winter 2016

March 10, 2016

THE EDITORS’ CORNER Michelle Black and Sean Kelly One day, the line between mental and physical disabilities may not be so pronounced, but, for now, distinctions are still drawn between Employee A with, for example, diabetes and…

Read More

Hiring the “Right” Employee

February 24, 2016

By Lisa Gallivan Employees can be your biggest asset, if you hire the right people. This can often be one of the biggest decisions that you make as a business owner or employer. The “right” employee…

Read More

Bye, Bye Canadian P.I.?: What Apple’s fight against the FBI means for the protection of Personal Information in Canada

February 23, 2016

By Burtley Francis and Kathleen Leighton Order Up: Apple, P.I. Recently, the public safety versus personal privacy debate has been brought to main headlines. Apple is facing a court order (available here) requiring the company to assist the FBI in the investigation of…

Read More

Client Update: Outlook for the 2016 Proxy Season

February 12, 2016

In preparing for the 2016 proxy season, you should be aware of some regulatory changes and institutional investor guidance that may impact disclosure to and interactions with your shareholders. This update highlights what is new…

Read More

Left Sharks and Copy Cats: The Super Bowl’s Impact on Protecting a Brand

February 5, 2016

By Burtley Francis and Michael MacIsaac You remember Left Shark… The Super Bowl is a lot of things to a lot of people and is arguably the most anticipated event of the year that is not a holiday…

Read More

The Labour Relations of First Nations’ Fisheries: Who gets to decide?

February 2, 2016

By Jennifer Taylor Summary The Canada Industrial Relations Board recently held that it had no jurisdiction as a federal board to certify a bargaining unit comprised of fisheries employees of the Waycobah First Nation. The decision…

Read More

Can an employer prohibit tattoos and piercings?

January 21, 2016

By Peter McLellan, QC In the 1970s the issue for employers was long hair and sideburns. In the 1980’s it was earrings for men. Today the employer’s concerns are with tattoos and facial piercings. What are…

Read More

Settling for it: Two new NS decisions on settlement agreements and releases

January 15, 2016

By Jennifer Taylor Introduction It sounds simple: Two disputing parties, hoping to resolve their disagreement without drawn-out court proceedings, will mutually agree to a settlement on clear terms; release each other from all claims; and move…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top