2 total
Payment of accident benefits does not create uninsured motorist coverage absent a valid policy.
A motion was brought to determine whether an insurer or the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund was required to respond to a pedestrian’s tort claim arising from a bus accident where the vehicle was not listed under the insured’s policy at the time of the accident.
Although the insurer had paid statutory accident benefits under the priority rules in O. Reg. 283/95, the issue was whether that payment rendered the claimant an insured entitled to uninsured motorist coverage under the Insurance Act.
The court held that the insurer’s obligation to pay accident benefits arose solely from the statutory priority scheme and not from an existing policy covering the accident.
Entitlement to accident benefits alone did not create insured status for uninsured motorist coverage.
The plaintiff was therefore not entitled to uninsured motorist coverage from the insurer.
Appeal from marijuana production convictions dismissed; search evidence and MOT database records properly admitted.
The appellant was convicted of production, conspiracy to produce, and possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking in connection with two rural grow operations.
On appeal, the appellant argued that the trial judge erred by admitting hearsay evidence from a Ministry of Transportation database, admitting real estate documents protected by solicitor-client privilege, and failing to exclude search evidence obtained under invalid general warrants pursuant to section 24(2) of the Charter.
The appellant also argued the verdicts were unreasonable.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the admission of the evidence and concluding that the cumulative circumstantial evidence reasonably supported the convictions.
