The Ordinary Meaning of Insurance: Client Update on the SCC’s Decision in Sabean
The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Sabean v Portage La Prairie Mutual Insurance Co, 2017 SCC 7 at the end of January, finally answering an insurance policy question that had divided the lower courts. The question was: Are future CPP disability benefits deductible by the insurer under the SEF 44 Endorsement as a “policy of insurance providing disability benefits”? The SCC’s answer: No.
Nova Scotia’s SEF 44 Endorsement is similar to “Special” or “Family Protection” endorsements that exist elsewhere in Canada. These are excess insurance policies. Coverage under these policies generally makes up for the shortfall (up to limits) that arises when an insured person is injured in a motor vehicle accident and cannot recover the full amount of her damages from the tortfeasor’s insurer.
Nevertheless, the SEF 44 policy sets out certain amounts that will be deducted from what the SEF 44 insurer has to pay. Clause 4(b)(vii) of the SEF 44 was the deduction at issue in Sabean. Under this provision, “future benefits from a ‘policy of insurance providing disability benefits’ are deducted from the shortfall in determining the amount payable by the insurer.”
Justice Karakatsanis, writing for the Court, focused on the ordinary meaning of the words “policy of insurance.” In her view, an “average person” would understand “policy of insurance” to refer to a private policy that a consumer can purchase, not a statutory scheme like the Canada Pension Plan to which all working Canadians have to contribute. This “average person” would not have the same in-depth knowledge of insurance case law as the insurer.
Only if the language at issue is ambiguous does the analysis move on to other rules of insurance contract interpretation, in accordance with the three-stage approach from the Supreme Court’s decision in Ledcor Construction Ltd v Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Co, 2016 SCC 37.
The Supreme Court left it open for the insurance industry to amend the language of excess policies like the SEF 44. If the clause had explicitly referred to CPP disability benefits, “an average person would have known exactly what they applied for as insurance, and what was and was not covered by the premiums paid under the Endorsement.” But where the language is not that specific, the ordinary meaning of the words, as understood by an “average person”, will govern.
Archive
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: DISABILITY INSURANCE POLICIES & LIMITATION PERIODS IN NOVA SCOTIA Two recent Nova Scotia decisions have clarified the issue of limitation periods in disability insurance policies and “rolling” limitation periods. THORNTON V. RBC…
Read MoreSection 156 of the Excise Tax Act (the “ETA“) provides an election that relieves certain related parties from having to collect Harmonized Sales Tax (“HST“) on the goods and services sold between them. The election deems qualifying…
Read MoreIN THIS ISSUE: More Than Wind – Emergence of Tidal Energy in Atlantic Canada by Sadira Jan Aquaculture and Salmon Farming in Atlantic Canada by Greg Harding The Expanding Atlantic Canada Offshore Industry: Growing Offshore without Going Offside by Stephen Penney and Rebecca…
Read MoreThe Supreme Court of Canada’s unanimous decision in the breach of contract case Bhasin v Hrynew, 2014 SCC 71 was released on November 13, 2014. The case is important in the law of contracts because…
Read MoreOn June 20, 2014, the Government of Canada announced a series of reforms to overhaul the Temporary Foreign Worker Program (“TFWP”). These reforms, many of which are effective immediately, function to: Re-organize the TFWP The…
Read MoreThe Editor’s Corner Clarence Bennett Summer is halfway over, but we know you will want to take this edition along with you while you enjoy more summer weather and time out of the office. Employers…
Read MoreOn June 26, 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada released one of the most significant aboriginal law decisions since Marshall – Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia, 2014 SCC 44 (also known as the William decision). This decision could have…
Read MoreIn Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services Inc. v. Brine, 2014 NSSC 219, National Life (and later its successor Industrial Alliance) alleged Brine had received undisclosed CPP and Superannuation disability benefits resulting in a substantial overpayment of…
Read MoreAny individual, business or organization that uses email, text messages or social networks to promote their products and services should take note of Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation and its accompanying regulations. Effective July 1, 2014, the…
Read MoreIN THIS ISSUE: Consistent Use: The Collection of Union Members’ Personal Information by their Union by Alison Strachan and Jonah Clements. Single Incident of Offensive and Threatening Facebook Post is Just Cause by Harold Smith, QC. The New Anti-Spam Law –…
Read More