Ontario Court of Appeal: Jakupovic v Intact SABS 32(1) Notice Requires Intent to Claim

• The Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that reporting a motor vehicle accident is distinct from providing notice of intent to claim benefits under SABS s. 32(1).
• The court in *Jakupovic v. Intact Insurance Company* clarified that SABS s. 32(1) requires explicit notice of an intention to claim benefits, not just accident reporting.
• The insurer has no obligation to inquire whether an insured intends to pursue accident benefits; the onus is on the claimant.
• This decision overturned a Divisional Court ruling that had found accident reporting sufficient, restoring the Licence Appeal Tribunal's original findings.
• The ruling emphasizes the importance of timely and explicit notice of intent to claim benefits to avoid claims being statute-barred.

The onus rests squarely on the insured to provide this distinct notice.

The Ontario Court of Appeal recently clarified the requirements for providing notice under section 32(1) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS) in the case of *Jakupovic v. Intact Insurance Company*, 2026 ONCA 651. The dispute originated from a motor vehicle accident that occurred on February 13, 2019. The day after the incident, on February 14, 2019, the respondent reported the accident to his insurer, Intact Insurance Company, specifically detailing the property damage to his vehicle.

However, it was not until December 12, 2020, nearly two years after the accident, that the respondent formally applied for accident benefits, thereby notifying the insurer of his intention to claim such benefits. Initially, Intact approved the claim. Nevertheless, the insurer later raised concerns regarding whether the claim was statute-barred due to the delay in providing notice of intent. Consequently, Intact informed the respondent that his entitlement to benefits would cease on April 14, 2022, citing late reporting as the reason.

Seeking resolution, the respondent applied to the Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) for dispute resolution under the SABS on December 28, 2022. An LAT adjudicator, in a decision dated December 22, 2023, found that the respondent had failed to comply with section 32(1) of the SABS because he did not notify the insurer of his intention to claim accident benefits within the stipulated seven-day period. The respondent's subsequent request for reconsideration under Rule 18 of the Licence Appeal Tribunal Rules was rejected by the LAT on May 21, 2024, affirming the original decision.

The respondent then appealed the LAT's decisions to the Divisional Court, which allowed his appeal on February 7, 2025. The Divisional Court concluded that the respondent had, in fact, complied with section 32(1) of the SABS simply by reporting the motor vehicle accident itself. This interpretation effectively equated the act of reporting an accident with providing notice of an intention to claim benefits, a distinction that would become central to the subsequent appeal.

Intact Insurance Company, disagreeing with the Divisional Court's finding, sought leave to appeal to the Ontario Court of Appeal. Leave was granted on October 9, 2025, setting the stage for the province's highest court to definitively interpret the requirements of Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule s. 32(1).

On September 17, 2026, the Ontario Court of Appeal allowed Intact's appeal, setting aside the Divisional Court's decision and reinstating the original LAT decisions from December 22, 2023, and May 21, 2024. The appeal court explicitly stated that section 32(1) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule – Effective September 1, 2010, O. Reg. 34/10, clearly and unambiguously requires an individual involved in an accident who intends to claim accident benefits to notify the insurer of that specific intention. This ruling firmly established that merely reporting the occurrence of an accident is not sufficient to satisfy the notice requirement for claiming benefits.

Crucially, the Ontario Court of Appeal clarified that section 32(1) does not impose an obligation on the insurer to proactively inquire whether an insured individual intends to submit a SABS application to initiate benefit payments. The onus rests squarely on the insured to provide this distinct notice. The court further emphasized that the legislature, as supported by section 258 of Ontario's Insurance Act, 1990, clearly differentiates between notice of an incident's occurrence and notice of an intention to claim benefits. The appeal court also awarded Intact all-inclusive costs of $10,000, while setting aside the Divisional Court's previous costs award.

The Court of Appeal also found that the Divisional Court had erred in law by exceeding the appropriate scope of appellate review. It determined that the Divisional Court had made its own factual findings that contradicted those of the LAT and went beyond a consideration of the legal provisions of section 32(1). Furthermore, the Divisional Court's reference to medical evidence that post-dated the LAT's decision was deemed procedurally unfair and outside the proper bounds of appellate review.

This decision in *Jakupovic v. Intact Insurance Company* provides critical clarity for both insured individuals and insurers regarding the notice requirements for motor vehicle accident benefits Ontario. It unequivocally establishes that reporting an accident and providing notice of an intention to claim benefits are two separate and distinct obligations under Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule s. 32(1). For individuals involved in a motor vehicle accident, this means that simply informing their insurer about the incident is not enough to preserve their right to claim accident benefits; they must also explicitly communicate their intent to pursue such benefits within the prescribed timeframe.

The ruling underscores the importance of timely and explicit communication from the insured party to avoid claims being deemed statute-barred. It reinforces that the responsibility for initiating the benefits claim process, beyond initial accident reporting, lies with the claimant. This interpretation by the Ontario Court of Appeal ensures that insurers are not burdened with an implied duty to investigate potential claims based solely on accident reports, thereby streamlining the process and reducing ambiguity in the application of SABS regulations.

Lawyers advising clients on motor vehicle accident claims in Ontario must ensure explicit and timely notice of intent to claim benefits under SABS s. 32(1), as merely reporting the accident is insufficient. This ruling clarifies that the onus is on the insured to provide separate notice of their intention to claim benefits, not on the insurer to inquire, impacting claim validity and potential statute-barring.

Source: Original reporting via Canadian Lawyer Magazine