This action arose out of a motor vehicle collision. The Court found that Mr. West was 100% responsible for the collision. However, the other party, Mr. Kotello, had not registered his vehicle nor was it insured at the time of the accident. Manitoba Public Insurance (“MPI”) asserted that for this reason Mr. Kotello could not recover the costs of the repairs from either Mr. West or MPI.
The Court held that Manitoba maintains a no fault insurance scheme for motor vehicles that is both compulsory and universal. The premise is that all vehicles must be insured. Thus, the Court found that Mr. Kotello’s car was required by law to be designated in an unexpired owner’s certificate at the time of the collision and it was not. Section 38(5)(b)(iii) of the Manitoba Public Insurance Act applied and thus Mr. West’s liability was reduced by the amount of the insurance monies that would have otherwise be payable to Mr. Kotello. Thus, Mr. Kotello was only entitled to be paid the amount of the deductible.
Similar Posts:
- Health providers may be liable for negligently treating people injured in automobile accidents in Ontario.
- A person using his park truck as a crane may be entitled to compensation for damages under his autombile insurance.
- A girlfriend is not a spouse or dependent under an automobile policy.
- Billing completed by a healthcare provider on behalf of an insured may constitute an application for insurance
- In British Columbia the amount of vehicle damage must be pursued internally at ICBC
