1978 non-pecuniary cap

mandatory_coveragesmandatory_coverages
in AB.Auto

supreme court of Canada in 1978 set a cap to non-pecuniary damages, how can Alberta bodily injury claims (specifically non-pecuniary damages) be a notable portion of why premiums are high?

Comments

  • Staff-TSStaff-TS
    edited January 21

    Before I get directly to your question, I would like to point out that the source describes some consequences of the Trilogy ruling, which include:

    • More intensified focus on the pursuit of pecuniary loss claims of traffic injured in the tort system, since non-pecuniary damages are capped.
    • Expansion of compensation rights.
    • Higher awards, due to more people being eligible for compensation and higher amounts in pecuniary damages.

    The source mentions (page 28, point 42) that there were some categories of injuries that were over compensated for non-pecuniary damages, even despite the cap. Combined with increasing cost of care & loss of income (pecuniary damages, as mentioned above), the report states that the Bodily Injury loss costs were increasing much faster than other coverages. Another reason would be litigation expenses for the insurer, which would end up being considered in the insurers profitability and the rates they set.

Sign In or Register to comment.