Ontario LAT: Falling Snow Qualifies as Automobile Accident

The Ontario Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) ruled in *Kroon v Belair Insurance Company Inc., 2026 CanLII 106201 (ON LAT)* that an incident where snow and ice fell from a gas station canopy onto a motorist refuelling his vehicle constituted an “automobile accident” under Ontario’s Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS). This decision, rendered on an unspecified date, found that the applicant sustained impairments as a result of the incident, which met the legal definition of an accident, despite the insurer's denial of benefits.

This ruling carries significant legal implications for personal injury and insurance law practitioners in Ontario, as it broadens the interpretation of what qualifies as an “automobile accident” under the SABS. By affirming that falling snow and ice, even without direct impact, can be sufficiently linked to the use of a vehicle to trigger accident benefits, the LAT has potentially expanded the scope of incidents for which claimants may seek compensation. This decision reinforces the principle that the chain of causation is not necessarily broken by seemingly external or environmental factors if they occur during the ordinary use of an automobile.

The legal context for this decision is primarily the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS), O. Reg. 34/10, a regulation under Ontario's Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. I.8, which governs no-fault accident benefits. The LAT is an administrative tribunal responsible for resolving disputes between claimants and insurers regarding these benefits. The tribunal applied the well-established two-part test from *Economical Mutual Insurance Company v. Caughy, 2016 ONCA 226*, which requires that an incident (1) arise from the use or operation of an automobile and (2) that the use or operation of an automobile be the direct cause of the impairment. The LAT found that refuelling a vehicle satisfied the