Case information

Constitutional law — Courts — Tribunals — Provincial jurisdiction over administration of justice —Role of superior courts — Provincial legislation granting the Civil Resolution Tribunal jurisdiction over certain disputes relating to accidents caused by vehicles — Tribunal given exclusive jurisdiction to determine whether an injury is a minor injury and specialized expertise to determine liability and damages for claims of up to $50,000 — Is the grant of jurisdiction to the Tribunal to decide certain tort cases, pursuant to s. 133 of the CRTA and regulations, contrary to s. 96 of the Constitution Act, 1867, by conferring a judicial power exclusively within the jurisdiction of the superior courts at the time of Confederation, contrary to the principles set out in Reference re Residential Tenancies Act, 1979, [1981] 1 S.C.R. 714 — Is that same grant of jurisdiction contrary to s. 96 by infringing upon the core jurisdiction of the superior court, contrary to the principles set out in Reference re Code of Civil Procedure (Que.), art. 35, 2021 SCC 27 — Civil Resolution Tribunal Act, S.B.C. 2021, c. 25 (“CTRA”), s. 133 — Insurance (Vehicle) Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 231 (IVA) – Constitution Act, 1867, ss. 92(14), 96.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Through amendments to the CTRA and various regulations, the government of British Columbia gave the CRT jurisdiction over the determination of: (a) entitlement to no-fault accident benefits payable under the IVA; (b) whether an injury is a “minor injury” under the IVA; and (c) liability and damages for personal injury of up to $50,000. The provision specified matters over which the CRT would have exclusive jurisdiction or “specialized expertise”, and s. 16.1 of the CTRA specified when a court must stay a proceeding for determination by the CRT. Further amendments to the IVA created a new cap on the amount of non-pecuniary damages that could be awarded in claims for minor injuries. The applicants brought an application for summary trial or judgment on the question of whether the grant of jurisdiction to the CRT offended s. 96 of the Constitution Act, 1867. The Supreme Court of British Columbia declared s. 16.1 and ss. 133(1)(b) and (c) of the CRTA unconstitutional and that s. 16.1 is to be read down as it applies to accident claims other than under s. 133(1)(a). A majority of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia allowed the appeal, holding that the grant of jurisdiction passed both the Residential Tenancies and the core jurisdiction test and was constitutional.