In the FSCO Appeal Decision of State Farm and Sabadash
(P16-00029), Director's Delegate Evans conducts a thorough
analysis of the key jurisprudence on causation in Canada of the key
causation decisions: Athey v. Leonati (1996 S.C.C.),
Resurfice Corp v. Hanke (2007 S.C.C.)., Clements v.
Clements (2012 S.C.C.) and Monks v. ING Insurance Co.
(2008 Ont. C.A.) and confirms that the "but for" test is
the primary causation test for SABS litigation.
Delegate Evans set out that the "material contribution to
risk" test could still be applied but only once the claimant
passed the "but for" test, such that there can be no
fallback to use the "material contribution" test if the
claimant fails the "but for" test. As a result, the
"material contribution" test only becomes relevant in the
rare circumstances where an accident alone and a
pre-existing condition alone could have directly caused an
impairment. Similarly, the de minimis test may only play a role
after the "but for" test
