SAAQ must treat drivers hurt clearing snow from vehicles as accident victims, Appeal Court rules

Quebec's automobile insurance board (SAAQ) must pay damages to two people who hurt themselves whileclearing snow off their cars, since the incidents must beconsidered car accidents, the Quebec Court of Appeal has ruled.

In judgments issued Monday in two separate yet similarcases, Quebec's highest court said clearing snow off a car is a "necessary measure" a driver must taketo operate the vehicle safely.

Therefore, injuries stemming from that action arecovered under Quebec's Automobile Insurance Act as car accidents, the justices ruled.

In the first case, Suzanne Pitrefell in the parking lot of a motel in Baie-Comeau, Que., in December 2012 as she was clearing snow off the rear windshield of her car.

Laval Blackburn, the man involved in the second case, fell in March 2014 while clearingsnow off his car in the parking lot of his apartment building in Saguenay, Que.

The cases reached the Quebec Court of Appeal after the SAAQ refused to compensate Pitre and Blackburn, who then sought damages from the owners of the motel and apartment building where their respective accidents took place.

However, the SAAQ not the owners of the motel or the buildingis responsible for compensating Pitre and Blackburnfor their injuries, the courtruled.

What does the law say?

The Automobile Insurance Act outlines the conditions the SAAQconsiders when deciding oncompensation for car accidents.

The act defines damage caused by a vehicleas anything caused in the use of a vehicle, its loador a trailer. It excludes damage caused in connection with the repair to,alteration to, maintenance of or improvement of a vehicle, however.

In these two cases, theSAAQ hadargued that clearing snow off a car constitutes an action related to the car's maintenance, and therefore, it wasn't responsible for paying Pitreand Blackburn.

That argument was rejected by the Court of Appeal.

Changing a car's oil, fixing the air conditioningor inspecting the brakes fall under maintenance work, the court reasoned, while clearing snow off a car is something a driver must do before operating the vehicle.

"Snow clearing doesn't come to mind in the range of maintenance services offered by a car dealership or a mechanic,"the justices wrote in their ruling inPitre'scase.

"The act of clearing snow is tied to the use of a vehicle and not to keeping it in a good state," they wrote.