Intact Insurance Company brought an application seeking a declaration on the interpretation of s. 44(1) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS), specifically whether an insured is required to sign any consent form dictated by the insurer for a s. 44 examination.
The respondent, Anne Beaudry, argued that such consent forms must be "reasonable and justifiable." The court found that any required consent form must be "reasonable," based on the language of s. 44, the insurer's duty of utmost good faith, and the Unfair and Deceptive Practices Regulation.
The court dismissed Intact's request to unilaterally dictate consent terms, emphasizing the need for reasonableness and negotiation.
