The definition in the Regulation does not purport to be exhaustive. Indeed, the drafters used the phrase “… means coverage for loss or damage … and includes coverage for …”, implying that the causes listed are in addition to other (unnamed) causes. Had the drafters wanted to limit the causes to those listed, they could have used language to make that intention clear. They did not. What the drafters have created in their definition of “comprehensive coverage” is all risks coverage, subject to specific exclusions, rather than named perils coverage, in the parlance of insurers. The result is that negligence as a cause of loss or damage is included in “comprehensive coverage.” To a similar effect is the judgment of the court in Jeffrey v. Insurance Corp. of British Columbia,  B.C.J. No. 1875 (B.C.C.C.). ORDERS
Get a full legal research memo!
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexsei.com.