Trotter and Morton Limited v Biegel, 2024 ABCA 312 is a case of interest with respect to what factual issues can be dealt with on summary judgment versus what requires a trial.

This case serves as a cautionary tale to insurers and as a reminder of their duty of good faith.

Norris v Vomacka represents the first opportunity for the Alberta Courts to consider the new “three-expert rule” implemented by Bill 41.

Following the ruling in Artindale-Eeles v Mercer, 2024 ABKB 233, credibility continues to be a significant factor in subjective chronic pain cases.

The recent medical malpractice case of Khaleel v. Indar, 2024 ABKB 203, acts as a good reminder in respect of costs and Calderbank Offers.

The Russell v Russell case has implications for insurance law in relation to the assessment of contributory negligence for failing to wear a seatbelt, and for damage assessments generally.

In Plante v Darling the Court found that the Administrator was not entitled to immunity from liability by virtue of Mr. Plante’s claim being filed out of time.

In Pederson v. Allstate Insurance Company of Canada, 2023 ABKB 198, the vehicle owner alleged the vehicle was stolen prior to the accident.