Uninsured motorist protection limited to $1 million

The limit of Underinsured Motorist Protection (UMP) coverage under governing legislation in British Columbia is limited to Cdn$1 million for all or each of the dependents of a passenger killed in a motor vehicle accident, the Court of Appeal for British Columbia found, dismissing an appeal.
In 1999, Cameron Carl Lougheed was a passenger in a vehicle that lost control on a mountain trail, causing the Jeep to roll over. The driver and Lougheed were killed, while another passenger was injured.
Co-operators General Insurance insured the Jeep and coverage for third party liability was limited to Cdn$500,000. The policy was issued in Alberta, where the driver lived.
In Lougheed v. Co-operators General Insurance, Lougheeds two sons commenced action under the Family Compensation Act (FCA), while his common-law wife commenced a separate FCA action.
The actions of the three, in addition to a claim made by the surviving passenger, were settled for pro-rated shares of the third party liability limits. The two sons accepted Cdn$156,000 without prejudice to any entitlement they have to UMP, Justice P.D. Lowry wrote. They then commenced action against the insurer, he added.
UMP coverage is mandatory in British Columbia; the limit prescribed is Cdn$1 million. The question, however, is whether the liability is limited to $1 million for all three dependents, or whether the limit is applicable to the UMP entitlement of each of Lougheeds spouse and sons.
It is accepted that had Mr. Lougheed survived, he could have recovered no more than $1 million UMP in respect of his injuries, Lowry wrote for the Court of Appeal. That would have been the extent of the coverage available.
The effect of his sons contention is that while his claim as the occupant of the motor vehicle would have been so limited, because he did not survive, the available UMP coverage arising from his death for them and Mr. Lougheeds spouse is three times that amount. In the absence of clear language that would yield that result, I do not consider this contention tenable.