Andrew Scott Kerr

The appellant, a victim of a motor vehicle accident, had her statutory accident benefits terminated by the respondent insurer.

The insurer's notice of termination advised her of the right to seek mediation but did not outline the full dispute resolution process or the relevant limitation periods.

After unsuccessful mediation, the appellant filed an action more than two years after the termination.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that the two-year limitation period under the Insurance Act does not begin to run until the insurer provides a valid refusal, which requires adequate compliance with s. 71 of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

Because the insurer failed to inform the appellant of the complete dispute resolution process, including the right to arbitrate or litigate and the applicable time limits, a proper refusal was not given, and the limitation period was not triggered.

The appeal was allowed.

The appellant appealed summary judgment dismissing her action for ongoing statutory accident benefits as statute-barred.

The central issue was whether the insurer's termination notice complied with s. 71 of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule, which required written notice of the procedure for resolving disputes under the Insurance Act.

The majority held that the provision required the insurer to inform the insured of the next procedural step, namely mediation, and did not require notice of the two-year limitation period for commencing arbitration or an action.

Because the insurer's notice was found compliant, the limitation defence under s. 281(5) was available and the appeal was dismissed.

A dissent would have required fuller notice, including the limitation period, and would have allowed the appeal.