The respondents were catastrophically injured when two individuals dropped a large boulder from a highway overpass onto their vehicle.
The wrongdoers had used a vehicle to transport the boulders to the overpass.
The respondents sought to recover damages from their own insurer under the inadequately insured motorist coverage, arguing the injuries arose from the use or operation of the wrongdoers' vehicle.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that the claim did not arise from the use or operation of a motor vehicle, as the rock throwing was an intervening act severable from the use of the vehicle.
The appeal was allowed and coverage was denied.
