|
Insurance (Auto) - Equity. Botbyl v. Heartland Farm Mutual Inc.
In Botbyl v. Heartland Farm Mutual Inc. (Ont Div Ct, 2025) the Ontario Divisional Court allowed a LAT SABS appeal, here from a LAT reconsideration decision which overturned an initial decision "that granted the Insureds relief from forfeiture of their insurance policy under s. 129 of the Insurance Act".
The court notes that parts of the Insurance Act other than Part VI ['Automobile Insurance'] still apply to Part VI:The LAT has jurisdiction to apply sections of the Insurance Act that are not part of the SABS and that codify equitable remedies.
[50] In Akinyimide v. Economical Mutual Insurance Company, 2023 ONSC 5272, the Divisional Court dealt with whether the LAT had jurisdiction to apply s. 131 of the Insurance Act, which codifies the equitable doctrines of waiver and estoppel. The LAT had found that it could not apply s. 131 as the SABS are a complete code for resolving disputes between insureds and insurers, s. 131 is not part of the SABS and the LAT lacks the jurisdiction to award equitable remedies. The Divisional Court disagreed, finding that s. 280 of the Insurance Act did not oust the LAT’s jurisdiction to apply other sections of the Insurance Act such as s. 131. It also found that while the LAT had no inherent jurisdiction to award equitable relief, it could do so if that jurisdiction was granted to it by statute. Section 131 granted the LAT the jurisdiction to apply the equitable doctrines of estoppel and waiver.
[51] Akinyimide is a complete answer to the suggestion that s. 129 cannot be applied by the LAT because it does not appear in the SABS and because it codifies an equitable remedy. Section 129, like s. 131, appears in Part III of the Insurance Act, and s. 122 of the Insurance Act provides that Part III applies to every contract of insurance in Ontario, subject to three exceptions, none of which are automobile insurance policies under Part VI. If the legislature had intended to exempt policies under Part VI from the application of Part III, it would have said so explicitly.
|
