A recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court considered the
definition of an "accident" within the meaning of an
aviation policy of insurance, with important consequences for
insurers and pilots. In Van Berlo v. Aim Underwriting
Limited, 2014 ONSC 4648, the plaintiff crashed his twin-engine
Piper Aztec aircraft while deliberately attempting to take off with
only one of the two engines functioning. The plaintiff sought
recovery of $140,000 under his insurance policy. The insurer argued
that the actions of the pilot were foreseeable, and therefore there
was no "accident", which is required to trigger the
insurance policy.
Van Berlo has a storied history. In the original trial
decision from 2012, the trial judge decided that the behavior of
the plaintiff was reckless and outweighed what was to be expected
coverage under an "accident" policy (2012 ONSC 5272). We
have previously discussed this case on our
Aviation Law Blog. The Court of Appeal reversed the
