The Plaintiffs’ vehicle was stolen and the motor vehicle insurer denied their claim on the basis that they made material and willful misrepresentations. The Court found that the Plaintiffs had made willful and material representations and their claim was therefore forfeited.

Bolen v. ICBC, [2006] B.C.J. No. 3045, British Columbia Supreme Court

Under the Plaintiffs’ contract of insurance, they were to use their vehicle for farm use only. The Court found that in breach of the policy, Mr. Bolen often drove the truck to work. The Court also found that the Plaintiffs had made a misrepresentation when they declared Mrs. Bolen to be the principal operator of the vehicle. Mrs. Bolen received a Road Start discount, for which Mr. Bolen would not have been eligible. The Court found that on the basis of s. 19(1)(b) and (c), the Plaintiffs’ claims were forfeited. The Court then went on to consider whether relief from forfeiture should be granted. The Court acknowledged that there was a particular issue in that previous jurisprudence has held that s. 24 of the Law and Equity Act does not permit a court to grant relief from forfeiture arising from s. 19 of the Insurance (Motor Vehicle) Act. The Court found that it did not need to determine this issue, because the Plaintiff’s conduct, and their breaches, showed a disregard for the duty of good faith and for the interest of ICBC as an insurer, and it would therefore not be appropriate to grant equitable relief in any event.

To stay current with the new case law and emerging legal issues in this area, subscribe here.