The claimant’s spouse was involved in an accident while a pedestrian. The claimant observed her spouse’s injuries later in the day while in hospital. Neither the claimant nor the spouse were named insureds at the time of the accident, so they applied to the Fund for accident benefits. Vice Chair McGee held that the claimant was not involved in an accident and therefore not entitled to accident benefits. The claimant was not present at the scene of her spouse’s accident. She first saw him at the hospital. The claimant’s trauma arose from seeing her spouse’s injuries at the hospital, which caused psychological injury to her. Vice Chair McGee found that this post-accident observation could not be said to arise out of the use of operation of an automobile, nor were the claimant’s psychological impairments directly caused by the use or operation of an automobile. The circumstances giving rise to the claimant’s impairment were too remote from the automobile striking her spouse to conclude that the claimant herself was involved in an accident. Further, there were several intervening acts between the use and operation of an automobile and the claimant’s impairment. Vice Chair McGee also went on to determine that the claimant was not an insured person under the SABS or the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund Act.
