What is the materiality of an allegation of fraud or wilful false statement in a personal injury case?

As to the meaning of "materiality", he went on to state: It is sufficient, in my view, if the fraud or willfully false statement is capable of affecting the mind of the insurer either in the management of the claim or in deciding to pay it. (See also Brown v. ICBC, 2004 BCCA 254.)

The burden and standard of proof applicable in cases involving s. 19(1) of the Act was summarized by Davies J. in Gill v. ICBC, 2006 BCSC 1397 as follows: In cases concerning the denial of coverage under policies of insurance under s. 19(1) of the Act, the plaintiff bears an initial burden of establishing a loss falling within the coverage alleged. That burden is not an onerous one. If the plaintiff meets that initial burden, the onus will then shift to the defendant to prove, on a balance of probabilities, intentional material conduct of the plaintiff that is in breach of one of the enumerated subsections of s. 19(1). Although the burden upon the defendant to prove such a breach is on the civil balance of probabilities, the nature of the alleged misconduct prohibited by s. 19(1) requires that the burden be discharged by clear and cogent evidence in keeping with the quasi-criminal nature of allegations of fraud.