Party Bus ruled more 'bus' than 'party' by Nova Scotia judge

A Nova Scotia judge has settled the age-old question: is a "party bus" more about the party or the bus?

Answer: it's about the bus.

"Vehicles may be put to all kinds of novel uses, some of which may be creative and some just stupid," wrote Justice Jamie Campbell in a 16-page court decision released this week.

The issue before Campbell was about insurance policies. Specifically, which policy covers injuries on board a party bus — the automotive policy or the general liability policy?

Party Bus Atlantic Inc. operated a transportation business, offering 45-passenger buses with en-route entertainment. 

It was insured by two companies. The Cooperators Group provided a motor vehicle policy, while Temple Insurance provided a commercial general liability policy.

Which insurance company should pay? 

On one trip, a female passenger "fell hard on her knees" when the bus stopped quickly, court documents say.

"She says that Party Bus allowed the consumption of alcohol on the bus and permitted the spillage of alcohol on the floor," the documents explained.

The passenger sued Party Bus, which asked its insurance companies to help cover any costs.

That's when the trouble started.

The insurance companies fought over which policy should cover on-board injuries.

A bus is not a shed. Or a diving platform.

Campbell first explained that Party Bus is not your average transit provider.

"The bus operated by Party Bus is not a form of public transit in which commuters plugged in to various personal devices avoid eye contact in the usually realized hope that a party of some kind will not break out," he said.

Campbell said the passenger was injured while the bus was doing what buses do — transporting passengers.

"The situation would be different if the bus were being used as a storage shed, a diving platform, or was being put to some use other than an ordinary and well-known activity to which vehicles are put," the judge said.

"Whether they silently suffer through a trip to a destination or enjoy the mobile party atmosphere, does not change the fact that the purpose of the bus is to convey people," he said.

Decision: bus was doing what buses do

Campbell's conclusion lets the general liability insurer off the hook and holds the motor vehicle policy provider responsible to defend the passenger's claim.

"A claim is still an automobile claim if it relates to the non-driving operation or functioning of the vehicle," Campbell said.

But there is still a judicial after-party to attend.

The next matter that could head to court is whether the passenger actually receives compensation for her alleged injuries.

So, this week's decision wasn't about what happens at the party. It was about who will be left paying the bill.