July 15, 2026
Are E-Scooters “automobiles”? The recent Alberta Court of King’s Bench decision in Le Prieur v Aviva Insurance Company of Canada, 2026 ABKB 452 (“Le Prieur”) answered this question in the affirmative. In that case, the Court determined that E-Scooters are “automobiles,” as defined in the Insurance Act, RSA 2000, c I-3[1], for the purposes of Section B of the Automobile Accident Insurance Benefits Regulations, Alta Reg 352/1972 (the “Regulation”).
This is significant because, when a pedestrian is struck by a vehicle, Section B of the Regulation provides limited no-fault accident benefits from the at fault insured driver’s coverage that are accessible relatively quickly: $50,000 maximum in medical expenses, disability, and income replacement ($600/week for up to two years). However, Section B excludes “the occupant of an automobile” from accessing this coverage, as they should have their own insurance to cover these expenses.
Facts of the case
There are no disputed facts in this case. Mr. Le Prieur was struck by a vehicle while riding his own personal E-Scooter in a downtown Edmonton bike lane on October 18, 2024 (“Accident”). He was injured and missed work because of the Accident. Mr. Le Prieur’s claim for Section B benefits was denied by the driver’s insurance company, Aviva Insurance Company of Canada (“Aviva”), because he was on a personal E-Scooter at the time of the Accident.
Aviva claimed that an E-Scooter should be captured under the definition of “automobile” and Mr. Le Prieur should therefore be excluded from coverage. Mr. Le Prieur claimed that “automobile” should be interpreted to include only vehicles that are registered and insurable, which would exclude personal E-Scooters.
Law: Rental E-Scooters
Rental E-Scooters like Lime, Bird, and Neuron belong to Edmonton and Calgary’s shared micromobility programs. These programs allow select companies to rent out E-Scooters, while imposing strict speed limits (20 km/hr), reporting requirements, geofenced areas, and insurance requirements (e.g., $10 million in Corporate General Liability in Calgary).[2]
Rental E-Scooter companies do appear to include some insurance coverage for injuries caused to riders and third parties within the rental fee. However, the limits and deductibles associated with this coverage vary greatly between companies and jurisdictions.
Law: Personal E-Scooters
Personal E-Scooters are not explicitly defined in the Traffic Safety Act, RSA 2000, c T-6 (TSA), which regulates the use of public roads, sidewalks, pathways and bike lanes in the province. Because personal E-Scooters fall outside the TSA’s recognized categories, while being motorized devices, they are treated as prohibited “miniature motor vehicles.” This de facto classification means that they are currently authorized for use only on private property.[3]
Personal E-Scooter riders who are operating on public roads are subject to the general provincial offences regime set out in the Provincial Offences Procedure Act, RSA 2000, c P-34, which generally includes a ticket of less than $1000;[4] however, they could be potentially liable for up to $2,000 in fines or even imprisonment of less than 6 months.[5]
A Silver Lining?
One silver lining of the Le Prieur decision may be that, as E-Scooters have been held to be “automobiles”, victims of collisions caused by the drivers of uninsured E-Scooters should now be eligible to apply to the government-operated Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Program (MVAC) for up to $200,000 in coverage. However, this assumes that scooters also meet the definition of “motor vehicle” in the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Act, which is uncertain.[6]
Some companies are beginning to offer insurance options for personal E-Scooters in other provinces, giving some clarity to the future of this accessible form of transport. However, as long as personal E-Scooters are prohibited from being driven on roads and pathways in Alberta, they will not be insurable for public use.
Further Questions
The Court’s determination that E-Scooters meet the definition of “automobile” in the Insurance Act raises the question of whether the Alberta government will reassess and clarify the classifications of E-Scooters, particularly considering their increasing prevalence and accessibility. If so, then surely insurance coverage will need to be offered and mandated.
Key Takeaway
If you own a personal E-Scooter, you should confine its use to private property, at least until the government makes legislative changes in the wake of the Court’s decision in Le Prieur. If an accident occurs, not only will you be ineligible for no-fault insurance benefits if you are injured by an automobile, but, if you injure someone with your E-Scooter, you would be personally liable, and potentially uninsured, for a personal injury claim.
[1] Section 1(d) of the Insurance Act, RSA 2000, c I-3 defines “automobile” as including “a trolley bus and a self‑propelled vehicle, and the trailers, accessories and equipment of automobiles, but does not include watercraft, aircraft or railway rolling stock that runs on rails.”
[2] Alberta Municipalities, “E-Scooters and Modernizing the Alberta Traffic Safety Act for Personal Use” (2023), online: <abmunis.ca/advocacy-resources/resolutions-library/e-scooters-modernizing-alberta-traffic-safety-act-personal>.
[3] TSA, s 120(2)(b).
[4] Provincial Offences Procedure Act, RSA 2000, c P-34, s 40.
[5] Ibid, s 7(1).
[6] The Traffic Safety Act, on which the Motor Vehicle Claims Act, RSA 2000, c M-22 relies, defines motor vehicle as: (i) a vehicle propelled by any power other than muscular power, or (ii) a moped, but does not include a bicycle, a power bicycle, an aircraft, an implement of husbandry or a motor vehicle that runs only on rails.
Please note that JSS Barristers insights are provided for informational purposes only. They are not intended as legal advice or a legal opinion. Please contact authors or JSS Barristers if you would like to obtain legal advice on this or other legal issues.