Motor Vehicle
Motor Vehicle
Overview
Experience
People
News + Views + Events
Notable Work

Field Law has a wealth of experience in advising clients on claims arising out of motor vehicle collisions. We offer services related to coverage, subrogation, property loss, diminished value, section B, SEF 44, and personal injury actions.

When retained, our lawyers are quick to develop cohesive strategies in response to new approaches employed by plaintiffs to build chronic pain cases or defeat the minor injury cap. We deal with complex issues of liability, causation, psychiatric injury, credibility and evaluation of damages. We engage in settlement discussions when reasonable settlements can be reached and go to trial when reasonable settlement is not an option.

Field Law’s insurance group provides services to many of North America’s leading insurance companies. We educate and advocate for our clients, while providing legal services characterized by excellence and efficiency. We proactively offer training and information to our insurance clients and speak regularly to the industry to ensure that all stakeholders are kept up to date on changes relating to the law of motor vehicle insurance. We know that insurers want to help keep the premiums of their insureds as low as possible. As professional legal counsel, we can help. We have earned a reputation for our commitment to professional excellence and the respect we offer our clients, the courts, and the rest of the bar. 

Bumstead v Dufresne, 2015 ABQB 787
October 2019
Case Summary: Pederson v Allstate Insurance
Defence + Indemnity
The Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench analyzed the application of solicitor-client and litigation privilege in separate, but related tort and insurance actions and confirmed that both the insureds and the insurer are clients of insurer-appointed cou...
October 2019
Case Summary: Bomford v Bomford
Defence + Indemnity
The statutory benefit for bereavement payable to a parent or parents under the Fatal Accidents Act is not available to a parent who is at fault for the death of their child.  Bomford v Bomford, 2019 ABQB 529, per Schlosser, Master  Fact...
August 2019
Case Summary: Merino v. ING Insurance
Defence + Indemnity
The Ontario Court of Appeal held that an auto insurer cannot void a policy for any material misrepresentation, including as to ownership. An insurer wishing to get out of an auto policy for misrepresentation must terminate the policy on notice, which d...
November 2018
No Appeal of the Cardinal Decision: SEF 44 Coverage and Automobile Used Without Consent
Insurance Alert
On November 15, 2018 the Supreme Court of Canada denied an application for leave to appeal the decision of the Alberta Court of Appeal in Cardinal v Alberta Motor Association Insurance Company, 2018 ABCA 69 (Cardinal).In Cardinal, the insurer, AMA, iss...
November 2018
Case Summary: Heuring v Smith
Defence + Indemnity
The Court assessed liability between a Plaintiff (cyclist) who failed to stop at a stop sign and the driver of a vehicle who did not clearly see the cyclist as a result of a “blind spot” created by a pillar in his vehicle and declined to aw...

Field Law has been involved in numerous leading authorities in Alberta with respect to motor vehicle collision claims: 

  • Counsel for the Defendant in the Bumstead v. Dufresene, 2015 ABQB 787, upheld in 2017 ABCA 122, leave denied 2017 CanLII 78691 (SCC) where the Courts clarified the law regarding causation, and provided commentary on the standard of review in cases involving allegations of chronic pain.
  • Represented a defendant in Blicharz v. Livingstone, 2014 ABQB 373, where the plaintiff was awarded less than the Minor Injury Regulation cap on general damages.  
  • Represented a defendant in Knibb v. The Carstairs Battle Cats, 2013 ABQB 754 upheld in 2014 ABCA 303, where the Court clarified the application of the Limitations Act to third party claims.  
  • Run several trials regarding diminished value including the Bustos v. Tardif, 2015 ABQB 202 decision, where the Court of Queen’s Bench clarified the evidentiary burden on plaintiff’s seeking to advance diminished value claims.