The defendant’s summary judgment application for a dismissal of the plaintiff’s action for one month of long term disability benefits, entitlement to two treatment plans, and damages for mental distress, and aggravated and punitive damages was dismissed. The Court concluded the defendant’s decisions were based upon proper principles and were not carried out in bad faith.

15. April 2016 0
Insurance law – Group insurance – Disability insurance – Policies and insurance contracts – Benefits – Long term disability – Medical treatment – Proof of disability – Good faith Bonilla v. Great-West Life Assurance Co., [2016] O.J. No. 1132, 2016 ONSC 1522, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, March 3, 2016, J.F. Diamond J. The plaintiff ...

Successful application to dismiss the plaintiffs’ action pursuant to Rule 4.33 on the basis three or more years had passed without a significant advance in the action

15. April 2016 0
Insurance law – Property insurance – Policies and insurance contracts – Duties and liabilities of insurer – Actions – Delay – Practice – Disclosure of documents – Rules of court – Jurisdiction of court – Retroactive application of rules Berlinic v. Peace Hills General Insurance Co., [2016] A.J. No. 183, 2016 ABQB 104, Alberta Court ...

The insureds applied for a declaration that their insurer had a duty to defend them in an action where the plaintiff was injured by a tree that was being removed on an uninsured property owned by the insureds. The court found the insurer had a duty to defend the insureds because the true nature of the allegation that the insureds were negligent for failing to hire a competent contractor was a claim arising out of the actions of an individual and was covered under the insured’s homeowner’s policy which provided coverage for “personal actions anywhere in the world.”

19. January 2016 0
Insurance law – Homeowner’s insurance – Coverage – Duty to defend – Bodily injury – Exclusions – Interpretation of policy – Derivative claims – Occupiers liability – Negligence of insured – Triggering event Hill v. Intact Insurance Co., [2015] O.J. No. 5898, 2015 ONSC 6601, Ontario Superior Court of Justice Ottawa, Ontario, November 10, 2015, P.E. ...

Long-term disability insurer’s appeal of a punitive damages award of $500,000 allowed in part. The Court of Appeal upheld the finding of entitlement to punitive damages but reduced the punitive damages award to $60,000.

19. January 2016 0
Insurance law – Disability insurance – Benefits – Policies and insurance contracts – Breach of policy – Breach of Good – Bad faith – Damages – Punitive damages – Aggravated damages – Costs in lieu of punitive damages Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services Inc. v. Brine, [2015] N.S.J. No. 486, 2015 NSCA 104, Nova ...

Application for a determination of the validity of a Change of Beneficiary form for a $100,000 life insurance policy. The court found the Change of Beneficiary form was not a valid declaration pursuant to the Insurance Act and was not a valid testamentary instrument that was capable of affecting the distribution of the deceased’s insurance proceeds.

22. September 2015 0
Insurance law – Life insurance – Interpretation of policy – Beneficiaries – Change of beneficiaries – Validity – Statutory provisions David v. Transamerica Life Canada, [2015] O.J. No. 4390, 2015 ONSC 5192, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, August 21, 2015, D.G. Price J. The deceased had seven children. Two of the children, Rhinda and Randolph, ...

Application by the insured for a determination that his two insurers were obliged to defend him in a personal injury action involving a plaintiff who was a paraplegic as a result of a tree falling incident. The court found that there was no duty to defend under the comprehensive homeowner’s policy; however, there was a possibility the claim fit within the coverage afforded by the commercial general liability policy and the second insurer had an obligation to defend the proceeding on the insured’s behalf.

22. September 2015 0
Insurance law – Homeowner’s insurance – Commercial general liability insurance – Multiple policies – Apportionment and contribution of claim – Coverage – Interpretation of policy – Duty to defend – Exclusions – Business exclusion Borthwick v. Lombard Insurance, [2015] O.J. No. 4029, 2015 ONSC 4845, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, July 31, 2015, A.D. Grace J. William Douglas was ...

Successful appeal of an application judge’s determination that the appellant insurer had a duty to defend its insured under a homeowner’s insurance policy. The insured’s son was hit by a car while crossing the road after getting out her van. The driver of the car was sued and he filed a counterclaim against the insured alleging she failed to take reasonable steps to ensure her son’s safety. The Court of Appeal found that the insured was not entitled to coverage from the insurer with respect to the counterclaim. The issue on appeal was governed by the decision of the Court of Appeal in Sheppard v. Co-Operators General Insurance Co.; Quick v. MacKenzie (1997), 33 O.R. (3d) 362.

21. July 2015 0
Insurance law – Homeowner’s insurance – Duty to defend – Exclusions – Coverage – Negligent supervision of children – Bodily injury – Arising from – Definition – Interpretation of policy – Ambiguity Allstate Insurance Co. of Canada v. Aftab, [2015] O.J. No. 2516, 2015 ONCA 349, Ontario Court of Appeal, May 15, 2015, G.R. Strathy ...

Judicial review of an umpire’s decision made pursuant to section 12 of the Insurance Act, R.S.B.C. 2012, c.1, regarding the value of stolen jewellery. The standard of review was whether the umpire’s decision was patently unreasonable. The petitioners (insureds) failed to identify a reversible error and the petition for judicial review was dismissed.

21. July 2015 0
Insurance law – Homeowner’s insurance – Property insurance – Policies and insurance contracts – Proof of loss – Valuation of property – Appraisals – Actual cash value – Replacement value – Standard of review Vandale v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Co., [2015] B.C.J. No. 942, 2015 BCSC 766, British Columbia Supreme Court, May 11, 2015, P. ...

The Court found on a special case under Rule 9-3 that the insurer did not have a duty to defend the insureds with respect to claims for negligent acts occurring within the policy period when the resulting damage (i.e., a landslide) occurred several months after the policy expired

21. July 2015 0
Insurance law – Homeowner’s insurance – Policies and insurance contracts – Duty to defend – Negligence of insured – Terms of policy – Expired policy Canadian Northern Shield Insurance Co. v. Intact Insurance Co., [2015] B.C.J. No. 943, 2015 BCSC 767, British Columbia Supreme Court, May 11, 2015, B. Fisher J. The insurer issued a ...