Reasons for judgment were published today by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, canvassing what steps are adequate for a hit and run collision victim to take in ascertaining the identify of the offending motorist before they can successfully make a claim under s. 24 of the Insurance (Vehicle) Act. In today’s case (Ghuman v. […]
In a rare case awarding punitive damages in a motor vehicle collision case reasons for judgement were released last week by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, making such an award. In the recent case (Howell v. Machi) the Plaintiff pedestrian was struck by a motorist who fled the scene of the collision. The Plaintiff […]
Reasons for judgement were released today by the BC Supreme Court, Kamloops Registry, with critical comments aimed at ICBC for their practices in dealing with hit and run claims. In today’s case (Fitger v. John Doe) the Plaintiff was injured by the actions of an unidentified motorist. The Plaintiff contacted ICBC shortly after the collision […]
I am the Victim of a Hit and Run. Can I still claim Compensation? Yes. If your loss occurred on a highway in BC, your injury or damage arose out of the use and operation of a motor vehicle and the name of the owner and driver of that vehicle were not ascertainable, you may […]
Reasons for judgement were released today by the BC Supreme Court, New Westminster Registry, dismissing a claim for damages following a hit and run collision. In today’s case (Li v. ICBC) the Plaintiff was injured in a 2010 rear end collision. After speaking with the at fault motorist the parties agreed to pull over and […]
One of the restrictions in bringing a lawsuit against ICBC for damages caused by an unidentified motorist is the incident needs to occur on a “highway“. Reasons for judgement were released this week by the BC Supreme Court, Vernon Registry, addressing the definition of highway in the context of a hit and run claim. In […]
I have written numerous times about ICBC hit and run claims and a Plaintiff’s obligation to make ‘all reasonable efforts’ to identify an unknown motorist prior to being able to successfully sue ICBC for damages. Reasons for judgement were released this week by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, further addressing this obligation. In this week’s case (Akbari v. […]
Last year I questioned the correctness of reasons for judgement which refused to make a substitutional order in an ICBC Claim involving an unidentified motorist. Reasons for judgement were released this week by the BC Supreme Court, Chilliwack Registry further addressing this area of the law finding that substitution orders are mandatory once the identity of an unidentified motorist becomes ascertained. In […]
Further to my previous posts discussing legal obligations when seeking compensation following an unidentified motorist collision in BC, interesting reasons for judgement were released this week by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, suggesting that in the right circumstances estoppel could be used to overcome a ‘failure to take reasonable efforts to identify the Defendant’ defence […]
Section 106 of the Insurance (Vehicle) Regulation permits ICBC to reduce compensation by any amount paid by another “insured claim” in claims for injuries caused by unidentified motorists or uninsured motorists under section 24 and section 20 of the Insurance (Vehicle) Act . Reasons for judgement were released last week by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, addressing whether […]
When not writing the BC Injury Law Blog, Erik is the managing partner at MacIsaac & Company, based in Victoria, B.C. He is also involved with combative sports regulatory issues and authors the Combat Sports Law Blog.
This blog is authored by personal injury and ICBC Claims lawyer Erik Magraken. Use of the site and sending or receiving information through it does not establish a solicitor/client relationship. The views expressed and the content provided on this blog is for nonprofit educational purposes. It is not, and is not intended to be, legal advice on any specific set of facts. The use of this website does not create a solicitor-client (attorney-client) relationship. If you require legal advice, you should contact a lawyer directly.