BC Court of Appeal confirms CRT’s jurisdiction

Last month the BC Court of Appeal in Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia v. British Columbia (Attorney General) upheld the Civil Resolution Tribunal’s exclusive jurisdiction to resolve “minor injury claims” and specialized expertise to resolve damage claims at $50,000 or less for motor vehicle accident claims. When determining where to file an MVA claim, consider that:

• actions for Part 7 benefits must be commenced in the CRT for accidents occurring on or after April 1, 2019;
• s. 15(1)(a) of the Civil Resolution Tribunal Act (the “Act”) provides that a party to the tribunal proceeding may not commence a court proceeding;
• s. 15(1)(b) of the Act provides that, if a court action is commenced before a tribunal claim, the parties must adjourn or suspend the court action while the tribunal proceeding is continuing;
• the suspension of limitation periods pursuant to the COVID-19 Related Measures Act does not apply to CRT claims; and
• s. 13.1 of the Act states that “the basic limitation period and ultimate limitation period under the Limitation Act do not run after a request is made under s. 4 of the Act for the tribunal to resolve a claim.” There is a 28-day time limit to pursue the claim in certain circumstances in the alternate forum (see ss. 13.2-13.4 of the Act).

Practice Tip: When you believe that your matter is not a “minor injury claim,” consider advising ICBC in writing before filing your NOCC (or after filing) that you are proceeding in the Supreme Court. ICBC may agree that the Supreme Court is the correct venue or may assert that it is not. At that point, you know ICBC’s position and can assess the appropriate course of action. Section 16.3 sets out factors the Supreme Court may consider when deciding whether it is in the interests of justice and fairness for the CRT to adjudicate a claim.   

For the latest updates from LIF, follow us on Twitter @Lifbc.