Canadian Lawyer

February 2010

The most widely read magazine for Canadian lawyers

Issue link: https://digital.canadianlawyermag.com/i/50811

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 33 of 47

Economica Ltd., a research company that conducted the report on personal injury damages for the CBA, there are virtually no cost savings to be had switching from tort law to no-fault insurance. "The evidence is clear," Bruce told Canadian Lawyer. "Experience in no-fault states and jurisdictions around the world indicate that the system is not effective in reducing the overall cost of accident compensation." To the contrary, Bruce says the half-dozen major studies carried out on premiums before and after the adoption of no-fault insurance in the U.S. and Canada show no-fault jurisdictions have the highest rates. Those rates are also going up faster than in at-fault auto insurance systems. Insurance company profits, too, appear to go up as a result of the introduction of no-fault. Bruce noted, for example, that the IBC reported the insurance industry made $750 million more in 1991 — a year after Ontario adopted its no-fault threshold — with no appreciable decrease in premiums. Those profits have only continued to grow, a trend that has not been lost on no-fault opponents. "The Insurance Bureau of Canada can spin it any way they want," said Robert Creamer, past president of the Atlantic Provinces Trial Lawyers Association, after the IBC announced the nation's insurance industry had made a record profit of $4.2 billion in 2005, a year after the IBC successfully lobbied the Maritime provinces to bring in the soft-tissue injuries cap. "The fact of the matter is [that] is a staggering amount of money, premiums for consumers are higher than ever, and car accident victims' rights have all but been expunged due to the arbitrary capping of injury damages." The evidence and arguments against no-fault, however, aren't limited to money and unfairness to innocent victims. Bruce notes several studies, including one from the University of Ottawa that looked specifically at Quebec, have concluded no-fault systems produce five- to 10-per-cent more fatal and serious car accidents than tort-based regimes. That adds empirical evidence, he says, to the gut feeling no-fault opponents have always had that at-fault systems are a better deterrent for reckless, negligent, and criminal drivers. "No-fault appears to discourage personal responsibility," says Bruce, "while incremental insurance seems to add to the perception of punishment." Paul McIntyre admits no-fault isn't perfect. That's why, as assistant vice president of injury claims with SGI, the corporation that runs Saskatchewan's compulsory auto insurance program, he says he's happy to be living in the only province that offers residents a choice between The Insurance Law Firm Easy to work with. Tough to oppose. Gilbertson Davis Emerson llp 20 Queen St., W., Suite 2020 Toronto, Canada M5H 3R3 t 416.979.2020 f 416.979.1285 gilbertsondavis.com GilbertsonDavis_CL_Feb_10.indd 1 34 FEBRU AR Y 2010 www. C ANADIAN Law ye rmag.com 1/19/10 3:47:21 PM enderson_CL_Feb_10.indd 1 1/21/10 3:49:16 PM

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Canadian Lawyer - February 2010