CASE LAW - Block v Schmitt

BC Courts Coat of ArmsChristina Block was driving eastbound on Yarrow Central Road near No. 3 Road in Yarrow. She and her family were returning from the movies. Kevin Schmitt was driving westbound and veered into the Block's lane, causing a sideswipe collision. Ms. Block pulled over and stopped but Mr. Schmitt did not.

The police later found and stopped Mr. Schmitt near Abbotsford. He did not have a valid driver's licence and did not have permission to use his parent's vehicle.

He had moved in with his parents to recover from a broken leg incurred while working on a pipeline in Alberta. Madam Justice Shergill examined the living circumstances and found that Mr. Schmitt was "a member of the family" and "living with" his parents within the meaning of section 86(1)(a) MVA. Vicarious liability for the collision was assigned to Kevin's parents as there was no requirement for proof of consent to use their vehicle because Kevin was a member of the family.

What is not made clear by the judgment is if Mr. & Mrs. Schmitt were liable to pay the damages of $215,557.57 themselves. When a collision is caused by an unlicenced driver the insurance policy could be found to be void.

Link:

What is not made clear by the judgment is if Mr. & Mrs. Schmitt were liable to pay the damages of $215,557.57 themselves. When a collision is caused by an unlicenced driver the insurance policy could be found to be void

As I would see it, ICBC as Ms. Block's insurer will have to pay her out the $215,557,57.

It will then be up to ICBC to determine if they can recover the costs from the Schmitts, and who they will go after. If it were their son Kevin who they held accountable, would they then have any commitment to the vehicle owners under their ICBC insurance?

Separately, I also wonder about Kevin Scmitt's licensing status, in BC and Alberta, prior to this occurrence.