Bus rider injured due to sudden braking not entitled to benefits

A public transit customer injured when the bus she was riding in braked suddenly to avoid a collision is not entitled to accident benefits, the Ontario Licence Appeal Tribunal has ruled.

The case turned on whether a person inside a bus could be considered an ‘object’ with which the bus collides.

“I find that the language in s. 268(1.1) of the Insurance Act clearly exempts a passenger on [a] public transit bus from receiving entitlement to Statutory Accident Benefits, except where the public transit bus collides with an automobile or any other object that is external to it,” LAT Adjudicator Melanie Malach wrote in a decision released July 29.

Sandra Mohammed was riding in a Toronto Transit Commission bus on Nov. 3, 2022. As her bus was about to enter an intersection, a fire truck with its emergency lights flashing went through the intersection. A vehicle ahead of the TTC bus came to a stop; in response, the TTC bus made a sudden stop.

The TTC bus did not collide with the vehicle ahead of it or any other object external to it.

However, Mohammed told the LAT the force of the sudden stop resulted in physical contact between her and the interior of the TTC bus, which resulted in injuries. “She therefore claims that the TTC bus collided with an object, namely her,” the LAT decision reads.

CAIB New Edition 1.0 – a New Standard for Broker Education Image

Insights Paid Content

CAIB New Edition 1.0 – a New Standard for Broker Education

Preparing brokers to navigate an increasingly complex insurance landscape.

By 

Sponsor Image

Mohammed noted the language “any other object” in the Insurance Act is not defined. She said no wording in the law specified the object had to be external to the bus, and nothing said the object couldn’t be a human being.

TTC Insurance Company Limited denied she was entitled to receive accident benefits for her injuries. The insurer referred to s. 268(1) of the Insurance Act, which states: “…no statutory accident benefits are payable in respect of an occupant of a public transit vehicle…if the public transit vehicle did not collide with another automobile or any other object in the incident.”

The insurer argued Mohammed was inside the TTC bus. Since the bus did not collide with any other vehicle or any other object outside the TTC bus, Mohammed was not entitled to claim accident benefits. In support of its interpretation, the insurer cited a section of the Ontario Automobile Policy (OAP-1), which defines the meaning of an automobile involved in a collision with an object as follows:

“Collision or Upset – we will pay for losses caused when a described automobile is involved in a collision with another object or tips over. Object includes:

                                    a.      Another automobile that is attached to the automobile,

                                    b.      The surface of the ground, and

                                    c.      Any object in or on the ground.”

The LAT agreed with Mohammed the Insurance Act does not define the terms “collide with,” “collision,” and “object.” But these words had to be read in the context of other relevant legislation and caselaw, the adjudicator found. That included the wording in the OAP-1, which “requires that the exterior of the automobile collide with the object,” the LAT decision says.

Malach went on to note a 2015 case decided by then-Ontario insurance regulator FSCO. It was the only decision with factual circumstances similar to Mohammed v. TTC Insurance Company Limited, she wrote.

In Christina Cusido v. TTC Insurance Company Limited, Cusido “was a passenger on a public transit vehicle when, due to a brake application, her chest area came into contact with a stanchion pole,” Malach wrote. “The arbitrator concluded that the term ‘object’ in the statute, when read in harmony with the scheme of the act and the purpose of the legislation, must mean an object outside of the public transit vehicle itself.

“The arbitrator concluded that the plain meaning of s. 268(1.1) [of the Insurance Act] is that it is the outside of the bus (automobile) that must collide with another automobile or any other object.”

David Gambrill

David has twice served as Canadian Underwriter’s senior editor, both from 2005 to 2012, and again from 2017 to the present.