Team Members ()

Publications ()

News ()

Pages ()

Services ()

  • Our Team

    Our Team

    • Lawyers & Clerks
    • Leadership Team
    • Board of Directors
    • Human Resources
    • Marketing & Business Development
    • Paraprofessional Services
  • Our Services

    Our Services

    • Service Areas
      • Aboriginal and Indigenous Law
      • Administrative Law
      • Agribusiness
      • Banking and Financial Services
      • Bankruptcy and Insolvency
      • Business Disputes
      • Business Immigration
      • Class Actions
      • Construction Law
      • Corporate and Business
      • Corporate Finance and Securities
      • Corporate Governance and Compliance
      • Cross-Border Law
      • Education Law
      • ESG (Environmental, Social, & Governance)
      • Estates and Trusts
      • Environmental Law
      • Foreign Direct Investment
      • Franchise Law
      • Health Law
      • Insurance
      • Intellectual Property
      • Labour and Employment
      • Litigation
      • Maritime Law
      • Media & Entertainment
      • Municipal Law
      • P3 and Infrastructure
      • Pensions and Benefits
      • Privacy, Data Protection and Cyber Security
      • Public Law
      • Real Estate
      • Regulation of Professions
      • SISIP LTD Allowances Class Action
      • Tax
      • Technology
      • View All
    • Industries
      • Cannabis
      • Construction & Property Development
      • Emerging & High Growth Companies
      • Energy & Natural Resources
      • Financial Services
      • Government & Institutions
      • Insurance
      • Manufacturing, Processing & Sales
      • Mining
      • Ocean Economy
      • Private Clients
      • Technology
      • View All
    • More Services
      • MC Advisory
      • MC Legal Lab
  • Our Insights
  • Our Firm

    Our Firm

    • Our Values
    • Our History
    • Our Representative Work
    • Our Global Reach
    • Our News
    • Diversity & Inclusion
    • Collective Social Responsibility
    • Pro Bono Program
  • Our Careers

    Our Careers

    • Lawyer Opportunities
    • Business Professional Opportunities
    • Paralegal & Legal Assistant Opportunities
    • Summer Student & Articling Opportunities
    • Diversity & Inclusion
    • Collective Social Responsibility
  • 1.866.439.6246
  • Contact
  • Search
  • Stay Updated
  • Contact Us
  • LexMundi World Ready
  • Privacy Policy
  • http://linkedin.com
  • http://facebook.com
  • http://twitter.com
  • 1.866.439.6246
Home > Our Insights > Nova Scotia Goes Its Own Way: Future CPP Disability Benefits Deductible Under SEF 44 in Portage Le Prairie Mutual Insurance Company v. Sabean and Hallett
Publication

Nova Scotia Goes Its Own Way: Future CPP Disability Benefits Deductible Under SEF 44 in Portage Le Prairie Mutual Insurance Company v. Sabean and Hallett

Published:

June 8, 2015

Author(s):

  • Sheila Strong
  • Ian Dunbar

Share

Print

On June 4, 2015, the NS Court of Appeal decided the value of future CPP disability benefits is deductible under the SEF 44 family protection endorsement because they fall into the definition of “any policy of insurance providing disability benefits or loss of income benefits”. The decision changes the law in NS, diverging from the NB law on the issue. The NS decision to go its own way creates two conflicting lines of authority on the issue of the deductibility of CPP disability benefits under the SEF 44 endorsement in Atlantic Canada – and uncertainty over which road PEI and NL will follow.

The claimants were in a motor vehicle accident.  Their claims were settled based on the Section A policy’s $500,000 limit of coverage.  They subsequently sued for the balance of their actual damages under the SEF44 endorsements in their respective policies. One issue: is the value of the claimants’ future CPP disability benefits deductible under the SEF 44. The NS Supreme Court said yes; the NS Court of Appeal agreed:

  • Purpose of SEF 44 Endorsement. The SEF 44 endorsement is intended to provide “last ditch” or “safety net” coverage that exceeds any amount the insured actually recovers. Since it is an indemnity policy only intended to cover the insured up to the extent of her loss, it should not provide a “windfall of double recovery”.
  • “Any policy of insurance” includes CPP Disability Benefits. In this context, the term “any policy of insurance” unambiguously includes CPP disability benefits. The Court of Appeal particularly relied on the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Canadian Pacific Railway v. Gill, [1973] SCR 654. The SCC decided that pensions payable under the CPP have the same nature as insurance contracts and are included under the definition of “any policy of insurance” – and are deductible – for the purpose of the BC Families Compensation Act.

Read the NS Court of Appeal’s decision in Portage Le Prairie Mutual Insurance Company v. Sabean and Hallett, 2015 NSCA 53.

Atlantic Canada Impact. Before the Sabean decision, there was but one line of Court of Appeal authority on the issue of the deductibility of CPP disability benefits under SEF44: that from NB, which NS and PEI had adopted. The Sabean decision changes the law in NS, diverging from NB and creating two conflicting lines of authority in Atlantic Canada and uncertainty in PEI and NL:

  • New Brunswick. The Sabean decision takes NS in a different direction than NB. In Economical Mutual Insurance Co. v. Lapalme, 2010 NBCA 87, the NB Court of Appeal considered the same section of the SEF44 endorsement. The Court decided that CPP disability benefits paid to the insured between the date of her loss, and of her damages assessment (in minutes of settlement or a trial decision) are deductible because they were “actually recovered by an eligible claimant from any source”. But future CPP disability benefits are not deductible: CPP disability benefits might be a “substitute” for a disability insurance policy for purposes of the common law collateral rule, but the analogy does not transform CPP into an insurance policy for the purposes of section 4(b) of the NBEF44.  The As did the NS Court of Appeal in Sabean, the NB Court considered decisions that adopted Canadian Pacific Railway v. Gill to define CPP as an insurance policy but preferred the Ontario approach that benefits under statutory schemes are not an insurance contract (Ellis v. Fisher, 1977 CanLII 1277(ONSC), affirmed [1978] OJ No. 3715 (CA)). The NB Court also considered the dictionary definition of “insurance policy” and that in the NB Insurance Act, concluding each contemplates a document that evidences an insurance contract and therefore excluded legislation providing benefits.
  • PEI. The decision creates uncertainty in PEI. In 2003, the PEI Court of Appeal decided a SEF44 insurer is entitled to deduct future WCB benefits in MacNeill v. The Co-operators General Insurance, 2003 PESCAD 9 (CA) but SEF44 section 4(b) lists future WCB benefits as a specific deduction. So this decision does not necessarily indicate a preference for the NS approach.
  • Newfoundland and Labrador. The greatest uncertainty lies in NL where courts have not yet considered this issue at all. Like PEI, NL courts now face two Court of Appeal decisions, both of which will be persuasive, if not binding, and two divergent approaches with no indication which NL courts will prefer.

Insurance Act section 113A implications. There might be a question whether the Sabean decision has any implications for the interpretation of section 113A of the NS Insurance Act. Section 113A provides for “all payments in respect of the incident” for income loss or loss of earning capacity under the laws of any jurisdiction to be deducted from awards for income loss and loss of earning capacity. Its object is to narrow the scope of the common-law collateral benefits rule to reduce potential double recovery for loss of income.  We do not believe the Sabean decision has any implications for the interpretation of this section. Section 113A is limited to “payments in respect of the incident” giving rise to the loss of income claim. Several decisions (most recently Hollett v. Yeager, 2014 NSSC 207) have concluded that CPP disability benefits are a non-indemnity benefit triggered by the claimant’s disability – not by the incident giving rise to that disability. The phrase “any insurance policy” in the SEF44 endorsement is broad enough to include both indemnity and non-indemnity insurance policies. But “all payments in respect of the incident” can only include indemnity policies so CPP disability benefits are not deductible under section 113A of the Insurance Act.


Please contact your McInnes Cooper lawyer or any member of our McInnes Cooper Insurance Defence Team to discuss this topic or any other legal issue.


McInnes Cooper has prepared this document for information only; it is not intended to be legal advice.  You should consult McInnes Cooper about your unique circumstances before acting on this information. McInnes Cooper excludes all liability for anything contained in this document and any use you make of it.

© McInnes Cooper, 2015.  All rights reserved.  McInnes Cooper owns the copyright in this document. You may reproduce and distribute this document in its entirety as long as you do not alter the form or the content and you give McInnes Cooper credit for it.  You must obtain McInnes Cooper’s consent for any other form of reproduction or distribution. Email us at [email protected] to request our consent.

Share

Print
View Related Content

Related Lawyers

  • Ian Dunbar

    Ian Dunbar

    Partner

  • Sheila Strong

    Sheila Strong

    Litigation Law Analyst

Related Industries

  • Insurance

Related Publications

View All Publications
  • Raising Coverage Concerns: 3 Risk Mitigation Practices

    Dec 13, 2022

    The insurer’s duty to defend a claim made against its insured is inextricably tied to coverage: there can be no duty to defend without a…

    Read More
    Publication
  • NL Court Confirms Role of Jurisdiction in Injury Damages Calculation

    Apr 18, 2022

    On March 28, 2022, the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador (General Division) decided that in a personal injury case, quantification of…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Fatal Accident Claims: An Atlantic Canada Update

    Mar 29, 2022

    The Supreme Court of Canada’s recent consideration of estoppel and waiver in the context of a fatal injury case in Trial Lawyers Association…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Court Puts Brakes on Estoppel Claim: 3 Insurer Take-Aways

    Nov 23, 2021

    On November 19, 2021, in Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia v. Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Company of Canada, the Supreme…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Slippery Snowbanks & Municipal Liability: When is a Policy Not a Policy?

    Oct 29, 2021

    On October 21, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada clarified the law concerning the circumstances in which government organizations - including…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Aviva Insurance v. PK Construction: Words Come First When Interpreting Insurance Policy

    Sep 23, 2021

    On September 9, 2021, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal released its decision in Aviva Insurance v. PK Construction Ltd. Dealing with Nova…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Predicting the Claims Landscape Post COVID-19

    Jun 11, 2020

    New types of claims will emerge while insurers may see an evolution or even decrease in the traditional types. Here are the types of claims and…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Coping with COVID-19: Assessing Travel Insurance Claims

    Apr 17, 2020

    The global and domestic spread of COVID-19 has forced Canadians to reassess their upcoming travel plans – and insurers to assess their travel…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Bailey v. Temple: NL Appeal Court Cautions You Don’t Get More Release Than You Bargained For

    Feb 14, 2020

    NOTE: On July 23, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada agreed with the Newfoundland & Labrador Court of Appeal’s decision respecting the law,…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Compton v. Toyota: N.L. Appeal Court Eliminates the Expert Fact Witness

    Jan 14, 2020

    On December 23, 2019, the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal effectively eliminated the category of “knowledgeable fact witness” in…

    Read More
    Publication
  • N.S. Appeal Court Confirms Future Wage Loss Calculated on Gross Basis in MacDonald v. MacVicar

    Nov 22, 2019

    On November 20, 2019, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal confirmed pursuant to section 113BA(1) of Nova Scotia’s Insurance Act, in the context of…

    Read More
    Publication
  • N.S. Appeal Court Confirms Future CPP Disability Benefits Are Deductible from Future Income Loss Awards in MVA Claims

    Jan 21, 2019

    On January 18, 2019, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal rendered its unanimous (5-0) decision in Holland v. Sparks, overturning a motion decision…

    Read More
    Publication
  • N.S. Court Decides Future Wage Loss Calculated on Gross – Not Net – Basis in MacDonald v. MacVicar

    Oct 25, 2018

    NOTE: On November 20, 2019, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal upheld the trial court’s decision and confirmed pursuant to section 113BA(1) of…

    Read More
    Publication
  • N.S. Court of Appeal Offers 5 Key Insights into the new N.S. Limitations Act’s Saving Provision

    Oct 12, 2018

    On October 11, 2018, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal released its first decision considering the saving provision in Section 12 of Nova…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Extended Earning-Replacement Benefits are Deductible from N.S. Section B Weekly Income Replacement Benefits

    May 11, 2018

    On May 8, 2018, for the first time, the Nova Scotia Supreme Court has ruled on the deductibility of Workers’ Compensation Board Extended…

    Read More
    Publication
  • N.S. Appeal Court puts a Lid on medical Pot: No health plan coverage & no workers compensation benefits in Canadian Elevator Industry Welfare Trust Fund v. Skinner & Skinner v. Nova Scotia (Workers’ Compensation Appeals Tribunal)

    Apr 26, 2018

    The N.S. Court of Appeal has reached two decisions ending one employee’s quest for coverage of the costs of his medical marijuana – at least…

    Read More
    Publication
  • The Dope on Medical Cannabis Health Benefits: Key Considerations for a Coverage Strategy

    Jan 25, 2018

    Insurers have generally been leery of coverage for medical cannabis in both the health benefit claims and in cost of care claims in the personal…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Watching Your Claims Go Up In Smoke? Five Key Medical Cannabis Cost of Care Considerations

    Jul 10, 2017

    The legal landscape of cannabis (a.k.a. marihuana, weed, pot …) is changing, both reflecting - and contributing to - more relaxed attitudes…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Supreme Court of Canada Puts Insurers on Notice in Saadati v. Moorhead: Proof of a Recognized Psychiatric Injury is Not a Precondition to Recovery

    Jun 5, 2017

    On June 2, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada decided that where a plaintiff advances a claim for negligently caused psychological or psychiatric…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Are Future CPP Disability Benefits Deductible? N.S. Court of Appeal Says Yes in Motor Vehicle Accident Claims in Tibbetts v. Murphy

    May 3, 2017

    On May 2, 2017, the N.S. Court of Appeal decided another case involving the deductibility of CPP disability benefits – but this time, in the…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Daniel Watt and Sara Mahaney in Gard Update: Legal privilege in the corporate context in Canada

    Apr 6, 2017

    Adding a third jurisdiction to Gard Update’s comparison between privilege in the corporate context under U.S. and English law, McInnes Cooper…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Dust Off Your Limitation Defence: Court of Appeal Doesn’t Apply Extended Limitation Period in Yarmouth (District) v Nickerson

    Mar 15, 2017

    On March 9, 2017, the N.S. Court of Appeal stopped building inspection claims in their tracks when it decided that a defence based section…

    Read More
    Publication
  • It’s Settled: SCC says Future CPP Disability Benefits Are Not Deductible Under SEF 44 Endorsement in Sabean v. Portage La Prairie Mutual Insurance Co.

    Jan 30, 2017

    On January 27, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada decided in Sabean v. Portage La Prairie Mutual Insurance Co. that future CPP disability…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Supreme Court of Canada Says Privilege Wins Again – Twice in Lizotte v. Aviva Insurance Company of Canada & Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v. University of Calgary

    Nov 28, 2016

    On November 25, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada decided privilege wins again - twice. In two separate decisions - Lizotte v. Aviva Insurance…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Supreme Court of Canada Gives a Lesson in Insurance Contract Interpretation in Ledcor Construction Ltd. v. Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Co.

    Sep 19, 2016

    On September 15, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada decided certain damage to a building under construction was covered under the relevant…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Limitation Periods: Avoiding Hitting the Reset Button in Tuck v. Supreme Holdings

    Aug 17, 2016

    The Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal recently affirmed the test for confirming a cause of action and thus resetting a limitation period…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Municipal Liability for ByLaw Enforcement: A Bylaw’s Not a Bylaw in Vlanich v. Typhair

    Jul 5, 2016

    The Ontario Court of Appeal has re-ignited the discussion about when a municipality will be held liable for its shoddy bylaw enforcement…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Weigh Now or Weight Later: New Cargo Container Verified Gross Mass (VGM) Rules Effective July 1, 2016

    Jun 20, 2016

    As of July 1, 2016, packed cargo containers to which the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), Chapter VI, Regulation…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Realtor Risk Management: 10 Practical Tips to Help Realtors Manage Litigation Risk

    Jun 20, 2016

    Real estate vendors and purchasers have high expectations of their realtors – and they don’t often hesitate to pursue legal action against…

    Read More
    Publication
  • From Watershed Decision to Watershed Law: Government Proposes Physician-Assisted Dying Law in Bill C-14 An Act to amend the Criminal Code and to make related amendments to other Acts (medical assistance in dying)

    Apr 15, 2016

    On April 14, 2016, Canada’s federal Justice Minister proposed legislation setting out the conditions that a person wishing to undergo…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Doe 464533 v. D.: Business Implications of the Civil Privacy Claim for “Public Disclosure of Private Facts”

    Jan 27, 2016

    On January 21, 2016, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice dramatically expanded the scope of legal privacy protection – and the liability…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Bad Faith & Production of an Insurer’s Business Information: 4 Key Implications of the NB Court of Appeal’s Decision in Wade v. Wawanesa Ins. Co.

    Jul 21, 2015

    On July 16, 2015, the New Brunswick Court of Appeal ordered an insurer to produce a significant amount of its financial and business information…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Final Form of New NS Limitation of Actions Act: “Sudden Death” Limitation is Out for Personal Injury Claims

    Feb 18, 2015

    The new NS Limitations of Actions Act – the legislation that determines the limitation period (time limit) in which a lawsuit must be started…

    Read More
    Publication
  • No More Criminalization of Physician-Assisted Dying: The Ripple Effects of A Watershed Decision in Carter v. Canada (Attorney General)

    Feb 9, 2015

    NOTE: On April 14, 2016, the federal government proposed legislation setting out the conditions that a person wishing to undergo…

    Read More
    Publication
  • NS Proposes New Limitation of Actions Act: The 3 Top Benefits & The 10 Key Changes

    Nov 3, 2014

    Note: On November 20, 2014 the NS Government passed the final form of Bill 64, Limitations of Actions Act into law. The final form of the Act…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Changes to NB Rules of Court Effective October 1, 2014 Benefit Successful Party

    Sep 9, 2014

    Effective October 1, 2014, the New Brunswick Rules of Court will change – some Rules for the first time since they came into effect in 1982.…

    Read More
    Publication
  • What’s In The Pipe? Municipal Liability for Flood & Sewage Back-Up Claims

    May 2, 2014

    April showers bring … flood and sewage back-up claims. Flooding and sewage back-up can result in significant damage for municipal ratepayers,…

    Read More
    Publication

Stay Updated

Subscribe to McInnes Cooper to stay current with our leading insights on legal updates, trends, news, events, and services.

Connect With Us:
  • Follow us on Twitter @mcinnescooper
  • Like us on Facebook @mcinnescooperlaw
  • Join us on LinkedIn @mcinnes-cooper
  • 1.866.439.6246
  • Privacy Policy
  • Copyright © 2023 — McInnes Cooper
Lex Mundi Logo MC Advisory Logo