Ontario slip-and-fall case unrelated to auto use, regulator finds

A passenger who got out of a taxi and fell on her way into a hotel was not injured as a result of an “accident” as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS), the Financial Services Commission of Ontario (FSCO) has found on appeal of Webb v. Lombard General Insurance Company of Canada.

The appeal overturns a November 2006 decision by an arbitrator, who found that the slip-and-fall incident was indeed an “accident” under SABS.

In Webb, the claimant, Diane Webb, was a passenger in the front seat of a taxi. The cab dropped her off at her hotel under a carport awning that extended from the entrance of the lobby. The cab was stopped so that the passenger side of the vehicle was facing away from the hotel.

Webb paid the driver, exited the cab and walked around the vehicle. She noticed a few ice patches around the cab. As she reached the rear of the cab and began walking towards the hotel lobby, she saw more ice.

Webb fell on both knees when she slipped on a piece of ice past the midway point of the rear of the vehicle. She tried to catch herself on the cab, but the fingertips on her right hand only touched the bumper.

In the original case, the arbitrator found the use and operation of the cab was one direct cause of Webb’s slip and fall.

On appeal, however, it was found that “Webb’s injury falls outside the scope of the ‘accident’ definition, and that the arbitrator erred in law in reaching the contrary conclusion,” wrote Nancy Makepeace, director’s delegate of the appeals unit of FSCO’s dispute resolutions services. Makepeace noted that because Webb got out of the cab and fell only after she began walking towards the entrance of the hotel, the cab was not a direct cause of her impairment.