Kevin C. Bunt

The applicant sought a declaration that he was an insured under two liability policies and entitled to a defence in an underlying personal injury action.

The underlying action arose when the applicant shot his friend in the eye with a BB gun during a game.

The respondent insurers denied coverage based on intentional act exclusions.

The court applied the Scalera framework and found that the applicant's actions constituted an intentional tort, as he intended to shoot and cause some level of injury to the victim.

The court held that the negligence claims were entirely derivative of the intentional act, and therefore the exclusion clauses applied.

The application was dismissed.

The defendant brought a second motion for summary judgment to dismiss the derivative Family Law Act claim of the severely injured plaintiff's father.

The main action, brought on behalf of the injured plaintiff, had been settled for a nuisance value and dismissed because there was no evidence of negligence by anyone other than the injured plaintiff himself.

The court granted the summary judgment motion, holding that a derivative claim under the Family Law Act cannot survive the dismissal of the main action.

No costs were awarded against the self-represented father.