Real Ways for Small Business

In Manitoba an appeal of the determination of the scope of auto benefits must be made to the Queen’s Bench

A decision under s. 79(1) of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Act must be appealed to the Court of Queen’s Bench.

Constantin v. Manitoba Public Insurance Corp., [2010] M.J. No. 254, August 20, 2010, Manitoba Court of Appeal, F.M. Steel and A.D. MacInnes JJ.A. and H.C. Beard J. (ad hoc)

The Manitoba Court of Appeal was asked to decide a stated case on the following question of law:

When the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation makes a decision under s. 79(1) of the Act, does the claimant or victim have a choice between:

(a)     a right of review under s. 172 of the Act (and a subsequent appeal under s. 174); and

(b)     an appeal to the Court of Queen’s Bench under s. 79(3) of the Act?

Section 79 deals with the scope of the Manitoba Public Insurance scheme. Ultimately, based on its interpretation of the Act, the Court found that a claimant or victim who wishes to challenge a decision made under s. 79(1) of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Act must do so by way of an appeal to the Court of Queen’s Bench under s. 79(3).

Similar Posts:

• Health providers may be liable for negligently treating people injured in automobile accidents in Ontario.
• Failure to attend mandatory mediations could result in a $40,000 cost penalty.
• Billing completed by a healthcare provider on behalf of an insured may constitute an application for insurance
• Personal motor vehicle insurance held by a person who rents a car, may not be primary insurance in accidents involving the rented vehicle.
• A landlord is required to pay for damages that fall below the deductible of required insurance.

Tags: Bench, Queens Bench