Advocis given leave to intervene in Supreme Court case

Industry group Advocis has been given leave to intervene in a Supreme Court of Canada case that will decide whether or not banks must license employees selling insurance products.

In the case Canadian Western Bank v. Alberta, eight Canadian banks are challenging the applicability of Alberta’s Insurance Act to any insurance sales that banks are allowed to transact under the Bank Act. The banks hold that provincial laws and associated regulations can not be applied in cases where banks are authorized to sell and promote insurance in the province, because the federal laws that govern banks provide them with immunity from provincial rules.

Intervener status gives Advocis the opportunity to file written legal materials, setting out specific arguments that the group would like to be brought to the attention of the Court.

“To get intervener status, you have to show that you have an interest in the case, that you would be impacted by the decision and that you can bring a perspective to the case that is already not being put forward by other parties,” says Advocis vice president of regulatory affairs, Sara Gelgor.

An application made on behalf of the Canadian Association of Financial Institutions in Insurance, an association for bank owned insurance companies, was not successful. The Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association meanwhile, an intervener in the lower court and Alberta Court of Appeal cases, is also not participating directly in the Supreme Court case. A spokes person for CLHIA says this is because the association’s membership has changed since the earlier cases, to include bank owned insurance companies. A separate insurance company group instead, has been granted intervener status to represent that industry’s interests.

“The Court’s decision to grant leave to Advocis is a solid affirmation that Advocis brings a unique and valuable perspective to the determination of the issue of whether banks must license their employees who sell creditor insurance,” says Gelgor. “We represent advisors who speak on behalf of consumers. We’re bringing the perspective of the advisor on the street who is speaking to Canadians.”

Other interveners in the case include provincial governments, the federal government and the Alberta Insurance Council. The groups have until March 31 to file their legal materials. After that, the court will decide if it will rely on the written materials or elect to hear oral arguments. “We certainly prefer to be making oral arguments, but it’s up to the court to be making that determination,” she says. “We probably won’t know that until just before the court date, April 11.”

Advocis says it will share the group’s position with the broader public once its submission is finalized later this month. In speaking about the case, Gary McLeod, chair of the Advocis board of directors says “this is fundamentally an issue of fairness. Everyone should be bound by the same rules. Along with our strategy for a single, common regulatory framework that applies to everyone, we believe that all those who sell insurance products should be properly licensed. Advocis will be there, in the highest court of the land, to ensure a level playing field for professional advisors.”

Filed by Kate McCaffery Advisor.ca, kate.mccaffery@advisor.rogers.com