A Comox driver has failed in his attempt to overturn an ICBC decision that found him fully responsible for a collision with a pedestrian during a dark, rainy December morning.
In a decision released January 28th, the Civil Resolution Tribunal dismissed a claim by Robert Bradley Fairall, who argued that ICBC was wrong to hold him 100% at fault after his vehicle struck a pedestrian in a marked crosswalk.
The incident happened between 7:15 and 7:45 a.m. on December 11th, 2023, at the intersection of Skeena Drive and Pritchard Road in Comox.
Fairall was driving west on Skeena Drive and stopped at a stop sign before inching forward to improve his view of the intersection.
According to tribunal findings, Fairall pulled about three-quarters of the way into the crosswalk to see around trees and parked cars. After waiting for northbound traffic on Pritchard Road to clear, his truck moved forward and made contact with a pedestrian who was walking their dog across the crosswalk.
The two did not exchange contact information or call emergency services.
The pedestrian continued walking, and Fairall drove to work. The following week, the pedestrian reported the collision to ICBC after recognizing Fairall’s vehicle in the neighbourhood.
Both Fairall and the pedestrian provided statements to ICBC, though their versions of events differed.
The pedestrian told ICBC that a driver had slowed and waved them through the crosswalk before accelerating and hitting them, causing them to bounce off the truck. Fairall, meanwhile, said he did not see the pedestrian until a hand struck the front of his vehicle.
He maintained the pedestrian stepped out suddenly and was wearing dark clothing without reflective gear. There were no witnesses, dashcam footage, or surveillance video to independently confirm either account.
ICBC ultimately found Fairall fully responsible, citing multiple sections of the Motor Vehicle Act that require drivers to yield to pedestrians in crosswalks and to exercise due care to avoid collisions.
Fairall challenged that decision, arguing ICBC’s investigation was flawed and that the pedestrian should bear some responsibility for wearing dark clothing and being difficult to see in poor weather conditions.
In her written decision, Stewart found ICBC’s investigation was reasonable and proportionate, noting the insurer gathered multiple statements from both parties and reviewed photographs of the intersection.
She also ruled that while reflective clothing may improve safety, pedestrians are not legally required to wear it.
“The responsibility to yield and to keep a careful lookout rested with the driver,” the decision states, particularly given the dark and wet conditions.
The tribunal concluded Fairall failed to prove ICBC acted improperly or unreasonably in assigning fault, a required first step under provincial accident-claim rules.
Because Fairall did not meet that legal threshold, the tribunal did not consider whether the pedestrian shared any responsibility. His claim was dismissed in full.
ICBC did not seek reimbursement of its tribunal fees, and no dispute-related expenses were awarded.
The decision confirms ICBC’s original finding that Fairall was entirely responsible for the collision.
