The claimant had attended a vehicle dealership to pick a van that she and her spouse had purchased. Construction was underway in the dealership parking lot. The claimant exited the dealership and proceeded towards her van, which was located by a sidewalk. As the claimant walked to the van to open its door, she slipped on an unmarked strip of gravel and fell to the ground resulting in a fractured ankle. The claimant applied for accident benefits and the insurer denied the application, stating that the claimant was not involved in an “accident” as defined by the SABS. Vice Chair Johal noted that parking was an ordinary and well-known vehicular activity, and “but for” walking to the van the claimant would not have fractured her ankle. However, the claimant did not satisfy the third part of the test, as the “use or operation” of the vehicle was not the dominant feature of the claimant’s injuries. Vice Chair Johal noted that it was insufficient to establish direct causation by merely stating that the accident took place near the vehicle, or that the incident would not taken place if the vehicle had not been parked in that location. The claimant’s application for accident benefits was dismissed.
