The driver was injured in a single-vehicle accident while driving a rental vehicle insured by the respondent.
The rental company also held an optional death and dismemberment policy with the appellant, which the driver did not purchase.
The driver submitted a claim for statutory accident benefits to the appellant, who refused to pay.
The respondent began paying the benefits and initiated a priority dispute arbitration.
The arbitrator ruled the appellant was not an 'insurer' under the statutory regime because there was no sufficient nexus.
The application judge overturned this, finding the appellant was an insurer.
On appeal, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant's policy was not a 'motor vehicle liability policy' and therefore the appellant was not required to pay first and dispute later under O. Reg. 283/95.
