A wharf damaged by a boat in a storm may not be entitled to insurance coverage

02. August 2010 0

A vessel was found to be a “waterborne object” for purposes of “windstorm or hail” exclusion clause.

Thorburn Wharf Fisheries Ltd. v. ING Insurance Co. of Canada, [2010] N.S.J. No. 296, January 7, 2010, Nova Scotia Supreme Court, J.D. Murphy J.

The Insured’s wharf was damaged when struck by a vessel which was blown into it during high winds. As attempts were made to move the vessel away from the wharf, a section of the wharf was torn off. The Insured had an insurance policy which contained a “Windstorm or Hail” clause which excluded coverage for damage “directly or indirectly caused by…any of the following, whether driven by wind or due to windstorm or not: snow-load, tidal wave, high water, overflow, flood, waterborne objects, waves, ice, land subsidence, landslip”.

The Insured sought an order determining whether the damage to the wharf was excluded from insurance coverage.  The Court found that “waterborne object” for the purposes of the exclusion clause included a vessel.  As such, coverage under the policy was excluded.

This case was digested by Cameron B. Elder and edited by David W. Pilley of Harper Grey LLP.

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