Further, the evidence did not support ICBC's contention that
the sick bank benefits were a form of insurance.
ICBC, relying on s. 106 of the Insurance (Vehicle) Regulation, asserted that the past income loss was subject to a deduction for
the sick bank benefits received by the plaintiff.
ICBC argued that by reason of the addition of the phrase «compensation similar to indemnity», it was entitled to deduct
the sick bank benefits and applied for a declaration to this effect.
Not exact matches
Community Pet Food
Bank: The Pet Food
Bank provides pet food and pet supplies for the
benefit of pets living with people on fixed incomes, with people who are
sick or disabled, working families that are struggling financially, and people who are homeless.
The government wants to get rid of the system whereby public sector employees can
bank sick days, instead providing them access to short - term disability
benefits previously unavailable.
~
Sick bank credits accruing to employee under contract of employment not constituting «insured benefit» under Motor Vehicle (Insurance) Regulation — Insurer not entitled to deduct sick bank credits from loss of income award in personal injury acti
Sick bank credits accruing to employee under contract of employment not constituting «insured
benefit» under Motor Vehicle (Insurance) Regulation — Insurer not entitled to deduct
sick bank credits from loss of income award in personal injury acti
sick bank credits from loss of income award in personal injury action ~
The Plaintiff agreed that while the
sick bank may well be a «
benefit» it was not a
benefit which had any element of insurance and therefore not deductible.