I refer also to the comments of Spencer J. in Bevacqua v. Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, [1998] B.C.J. No. 993, (April 29, 1998) where the defendant's primary position was that the plaintiff had made a wilfully false statement to the effect that he did not know the persons who had vandalized his vehicle. His Lordship noted that vandalism does not occur where the owner is directly or indirectly involved in wilfully damaging his vehicle and therefore accepted that it was incumbent upon the plaintiff to prove on a balance of probabilities that he was not involved in the damage to his car.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.