The Court granted the application under Rule 18A for payment of life insurance funds to a beneficiary determined to have been designated as “irrevocable” after finding that the requirements of s. 49 of the Insurance Act had been substantially complied with

Re: Dahl, [2005] B.C.J. No. 3043, British Columbia Supreme Court

This was an application under Rule 18A for payment of life insurance funds that had been paid into court by the Insurer. A dispute arose between two potential beneficiaries to a life insurance policy. The two potential beneficiaries were the deceased’s brother, Mr. Dahl, and someone who may have been the deceased’s common law wife, Ms. Billsborough. Both Mr. Dahl and Ms. Billsborough were named as beneficiaries at different times; however, Mr. Dahl was named prior to Ms. Billsborough.

The issue was whether Mr. Dahl was an ordinary or an irrevocable beneficiary. Ordinary beneficiaries can be superseded by other beneficiaries named later, whereas irrevocable beneficiaries cannot. Mr. Dahl argued that he was not an ordinary beneficiary and that he was designated as an irrevocable beneficiary as referred to in s. 49 of the Insurance Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 226 and that therefore the deceased had no power to name Ms. Billsborough as another beneficiary.

The decision turned largely on an examination of the form signed by the deceased naming Mr. Dahl as a beneficiary and whether or not that form complied with s. 49 of the Act. The deceased clearly wrote the word “irrevocable” on the form on the line indicated. Section 49(1) of the Insurance Act states that an insured may file with the insurer during the lifetime of the person whose life is insured designating a beneficiary irrevocably and in that event, the insured may not alter or revoke the designation without the consent of the beneficiary. Subsection 2 states that if the form is not filed, the designation is revocable.

The Court found that three of the requirements of s. 49, which describe how to properly designate a beneficiary as irrevocable, were met. First, a beneficiary was designated. Second, the designation was clear and unambiguous. Third, while the form was not filed at the head office, it was provided to an agent of the insurance company. The Court found that because s. 49 was complied with, it was not necessary to consider the question of whether or not compliance occurred during the lifetime of the deceased. Accordingly, the Court granted the application under Rule 18A for payment out of life insurance funds to the irrevocable beneficiary, Mr. Dahl.

To stay current with the new case law and emerging legal issues in this area, subscribe here.