Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada has lost a case in the Supreme Court of British Columbia requiring it to pay aggravated damages to a disabled woman it stopped paying benefits to after videotaping her and concluding she was no longer disabled.

The court, however, refused to impose punitive damages.

The plaintiff, Connie Fidler, was a Royal Bank employee. In June 1990, she became ill with peylonephritis and shortly after developed chronic fatigue syndrome. A short time later she was also diagnosed as having fibromyalgia.

RBC had a group policy with Sun Life which included long term disability benefits. Fidler started receiving those benefits in January 1991, and they continued until May 1997. At that point, Sun Life took the position that Fidler was no longer totally disabled as defined under the policy and discontinued payments.

The insurer reached its decision after conducting video surveillance on Fidler in late 1996. As a result of the video, Sun Life concluded that Fidler was not totally disabled from engaging in any occupation.

Fidler commenced the action against Sun Life in February 1999 claiming that she remained totally disabled and was therefore entitled to the benefits of the policy including payments going back to 1997. In addition to claiming the benefits, she also claimed aggravated damages, damages for mental distress and punitive damages.

One week before going to trial Sun Life agreed to reinstate Fidler and to pay her the arrears of monthly benefits. The trial continued to determine, whether Fidler was entitled to aggravated damages and punitive damages.

The court concluded that Fidler suffered mental distress and was entitled to aggravated damages. It assessed damages for mental distress in the amount of $20,000.

The court, however, rejected Fidler’s claim for punitive damages, ruling, stating it was “not satisfied that this is one of those exceptional cases where punitive damages should be awarded.”