Kyla Lee

Priuses spinning out into a snowbank. Buses stuck on hills. And now, snarling traffic leaving hundreds of people stranded in the biggest snowfall of the year.

It’s not uncommon to have snow in Metro Vancouver, but for some reason, it always seems to come unexpected. 

But what happens if you had summer tires on and got in an accident? Can driving your car without winter tires void your insurance coverage if you get in a accident?

No, according to the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia (ICBC) — not even on highways where it’s required during the winter months.

…

There are two things ICBC looks at to assess an insurance claim, says criminal lawyer Kyla Lee — one, are you insured? Do you have certain offences that can invalidate your insurance such as an expired or prohibited licence?

If you drive without snow tires along a mountain highway in the winter, you may be in breach of the law, but not any more than if you were speeding, says the lawyer.

“Not following the rules of the road doesn’t mean you’re not insured,” she said. “You’re still insured, you’re just negligent.”

That could affect how much your insurance will go up or whether or not you have to pay a deductible with the claim.

Read the full story here.

The Supreme Court of Canada’s 5-4 decision in Sharma has left many in the legal community disappointed with its interpretation of Section 15 Charter rights and in addressing the impact of mandatory minimum sentences on Indigenous people, women in particular. Still, there is reason for optimism that the federal government’s Bill C-5, currently before the Senate, will mark an extra step towards removing some of them from the Criminal Code.

“The outcome is really frustrating,” says Kyla Lee, a criminal defence lawyer with Acumen Law Corporation and the vice-chair of the CBA’s criminal justice section. “There is obviously a significant conflict between Sharma and previous Section 15 decisions, which talks about where the burden lies in proving that something is discriminatory.”

In Sharma, the majority allowed an appeal by the Crown that restored the accused’s sentence of imprisonment, thereby affirming the constitutionality of provisions that restrict the availability of conditional sentences for certain Criminal Code offences — in the case at hand, for importing cocaine. 

Lee takes issue with the majority’s view that it needs statistical and academic evidence showing that eliminating conditional sentencing orders contributes to the over-incarceration of Indigenous people. It should have been able to draw the inference, she says.

Read the full story here.