A Change of Beneficiary Designation was found to be valid within the meaning of s.171(1) of the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, chap. I. 8

10. October 2017 0
Insurance law – Life insurance – Group insurance – Change of beneficiaries – Validity – Irrevocable beneficiaries – Statutory provisions Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada v. Nelson Estate, [2017] O.J. No. 4394, 2017 ONSC 4987, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, August 23, 2017, C.J. Brown J. In 1999, the insured purchased a life insurance ...

Insurer’s action for fraud, unjust enrichment and conspiracy was dismissed because the insurer failed to meet the burden of showing the insureds’ representations were false

10. October 2017 0
Insurance law – Automobile insurance – Fraud – Evidence – Actions – Conspiracy Insurance Corp. of British Columbia v. Mehat, [2017] B.C.J. No. 1667, 2017 BCSC 1476, British Columbia Supreme Court, August 24, 2017, M.B. Blok J. The insurer brought an action against Mr. and Mrs. Mehat for fraud, unjust enrichment and conspiracy regarding a ...

Sections 267.5(1) and 280 of the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. I.8, do not violate sections 15 and 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

14. July 2017 0
Insurance law – Automobile insurance – Statutory provisions – Interpretation of legislation – Constitutional issues – Charter of Rights Campisi v. Ontario (Attorney General), [2017] O.J. No. 2777, 2017 ONSC 2884, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, May 31, 2017, E.P. Belobaba J. Joseph Campisi brought an application challenging the constitutionality of two automobile accident provisions in ...

Insurers in Ontario are not required to advise their insureds of the applicable limitation period when denying or discontinuing insurance benefits

14. July 2017 0
Insurance law – Accident and sickness insurance – Total disability – Policies and insurance contracts – Limitation of actions – Running of limitation period – Statutory provisions – Good faith – Summary judgment – Practice – Appeals Usanovic v. Capitale Life Insurance Co. (c.o.b. La Capitale Financial Security Insurance Co.), [2017] O.J. No. 2565, 2017 ...

Insurer ordered to defend the City of Markham in an action involving allegations of failure to remove ice or snow from a sidewalk because the City of Markham was an additional insured under the third party snow removal contractor’s insurance policy

14. July 2017 0
Insurance law – Commercial general liability insurance – Duty to defend – Third parties Markham (City) v. Intact Insurance Co., [2017] O.J. No. 2609, 2017 ONSC 3150, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, May 23, 2017, G.P. DiTomaso J. Hasan Jalal allegedly slipped and fell on an icy and snowy sidewalk in the City of Markham ...

The insurer was not required to provide the insured with a defence in an action arising out of a motor vehicle accident because there was a clear breach of the mandatory condition that the insured shall not drive or operate an automobile while his licence to drive or operate an automobile is suspended

09. May 2017 0
Insurance law – Automobile insurance – Actions – Duty to defend – Breach of policy – Pleadings MacLellan v. Intact Insurance Co., [2017] N.S.J. No. 92, 2017 NSSC 58, Nova Scotia Supreme Court, March 13, 2017, D. Boudreau J. A motor vehicle accident occurred on January 1, 2012 and Holly Grue commenced an action against the owner ...

A misrepresentation by one co insured under s.554 of the Insurance Act, RSA 2000, c I 3, does not affect an innocent co-insured’s interests because the statutory condition does not contain express language indicating misrepresentations by one insured will invalidate the policy as against an innocent co-insured

09. May 2017 0
Insurance law – Automobile insurance – Co-insurance – Statutory provisions – Interpretation – Misrepresentation in obtaining insurance Haraba v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Co., [2017] A.J. No. 274, 2017 ABQB 190, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, March 21, 2017, D.L. Shelley J. Ms. Haraba, the insured, was named as the primary driver of a car and the ...

The wording “post office to which it is addressed” in statutory condition 5(5) of the Insurance Act, RSA 2000, c. I 3, s. 549, is not ambiguous; the amendment to the statutory condition in 2012 was a change of legislative policy and does not change the interpretation of the wording in 2011.

09. May 2017 0
Insurance law – Fire insurance – Termination of policy – Statutory provisions – Interpretation 1037466 Alberta Ltd. (c.o.b. Shadified Salon and Spa) v. Intact Insurance Co., [2017] A.J. No. 245, 2017 ABQB 172, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, March 13, 2017, B.R. Burrows J. The insured’s salon and spa was destroyed by fire on September 26, 2012. ...

Successful action by insurer against three individuals for breach of contract for staging a motor vehicle accident

14. March 2017 0
Insurance law – Automobile insurance – Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule – Damages – Repayment – Motor vehicle accidents – Joint and several liability – Policies and insurance contracts – Rights and duties of insured – Breach of policy – Actions – Limitation of actions Intact Insurance Co. v. Thompson, [2016] O.J. No 6696, Ontario Superior ...