What constitutes an accident in the context of the term "accident"?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from Kranz v. The Boiler Inspection and Insurance Company of Canada, 1995 CanLII 490 (BC SC):
26 However, Spence J. in Mutual of Omaha v. Stats, supra, held, at p. 1164: These two definitions would bring within the term "accident" those which result from the negligence of the actor whose acts are being considered even if that negligence were gross. With this view, I agree for the reason that to exclude from the word "accident" any act which involved negligence would be to exclude the very largest proportions of the risks insured against. That passage makes it clear that negligent conduct does not remove the case from the ambit of what constitutes an "accident."
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Does the word “immediate hazard” in the context of a motor vehicle accident constitute a standard of care? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for the admissibility of constitutional reference materials in the context of constitutional references? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a motor vehicle accident is an accident or an accident? (British Columbia, Canada)
In a motor vehicle accident reconstruction case, can the accident reconstruction experts provide any assistance? (British Columbia, Canada)
What constitutes a "willful false statement" by a person in the context of an insurance claim? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the evidence in the context of a motor vehicle accident? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can silence constitute negligent misrepresentation in the real estate context? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for establishing causation between a motor vehicle accident and a subsequent accident? (British Columbia, Canada)
When there is little or no objective evidence of continuing injury in the context of a claim for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident, does the claimant have to prove that there is a continuing injury? (British Columbia, Canada)
In a motor vehicle accident, can a plaintiff continue to suffer from chronic neck and back pain for at least three years after the accident? (British Columbia, Canada)
