Matthew Wells

The plaintiff was injured while riding as a passenger on an ATV driven by Tyler Drenth and owned by Theodore Drenth.

The third-party insurer denied coverage on the basis that Tyler breached a statutory condition of the automobile policy by driving on a highway with a G1 licence after consuming alcohol.

The plaintiff brought a motion for summary judgment seeking a declaration that the full third-party limits were available to Theodore.

The court found that Theodore only consented to Tyler driving on a specific lane to access trails, and did not consent to him driving on the shoulder of the road where the accident occurred.

The court held that Theodore's breach of the statutory condition by permitting Tyler to drive on the lane did not taint the entire trip.

The court also found that, in the alternative, relief from forfeiture would be granted.

The plaintiff's motion for summary judgment was granted.

The appellants appealed a summary judgment decision granted in favour of the respondent on a motion concerning the interpretation of paragraph 20 of a Licence Agreement between Gro-Bark and Eacom.

The motion judge granted summary judgment by simply adopting the respondent's factum without engaging in the required contractual interpretative exercise or articulating the basis for his findings.

The Court of Appeal found that the motion judge failed to properly analyze the evidence and explain his reasoning, and therefore allowed the appeal and set aside the decision.