As between the limitation period in an insurance policy and the limitation period set out in Section 22(1) of the Insurance Act of British Columbia, the limitation period in the policy prevails so long as it is not shorter than that prescribed by Section 22(1). Colgur v. Manufacturers Life Insurance Co., [2009] B.C.J. No. 1644, ...
Court considered the Statement of Claim, the insurance policy, and a contract of indemnity in determining whether the Insurer had a duty to defend the Insureds in relation to a Third Party Notice. Tarrabain v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Co., [2009] A.J. No. 912, May 4, 2009, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, L.J. Smith J.
An insured under the uninsured coverage provisions of Ontario’s standard O.A.P. 1 is only disentitled to recover under the uninsured coverage in O.A.P. 1 based on the negligence of an insured joint tortfeasor where the joint tortfeasor’s insurer admits liability to pay or where the insured obtained a judgment against the joint tortfeasor. Loftus v. ...
The Court found that it could apply the remedial provisions of s. 109 of The Saskatchewan Insurance Act to the requirements of s. 3(3) of The Small Claims Act. Lamb v. Mennonite Mutual Fire Insurance Co. of Saskatchewan, [2009] S.J. No. 272, April 15, 2009, Saskatchewan Provincial Court, G.T. Seniuk Prov. Ct. J.
An Insured was denied indemnity for falsely reporting the value of the vehicle. Gotsutsov. v. Insurance Corp. of British Columbia, [2009] B.C.J. No. 1011, May 12, 2009, British Columbia Provincial Court, H. Dhillon Prov. Ct. J.
The beneficiary of a life insurance policy was not unjustly enriched, even though she did not pay the premiums, as she was designated the beneficiary pursuant to a separation agreement. Richardson Estate v. Mew, [2009], O.J. No. 1947, March 25, 2009, Ontario Court of Appeal, K.N. Feldman, E.E. Gillese and P.S. Rouleau JJ.A.
The client of an Insured did not conceal her vehicle from the Insurer when she parked it several blocks from her residence in order to avoid repossession. MFI Mobil Finance (2006) Inc. v. Insurance Corp. of British Columbia, [2009] B.C.J. No. 1009, April 14, 2009, British Columbia Provincial Court, S.D. Dley Prov. Ct. J.
Plaintiff Insurance Broker sought a Declaration that it was not liable to pay the Defendants, an insurance company and an insurance broker, premiums for an extension of insurance coverage. The Plaintiff also sought $100,000 in general damages for intentional interference with its economic relations and $50,000 in special damages. Application allowed in part. M.B. Kouri Insurance ...
Plaintiff Surety brought a motion for summary judgment against the Defendant Construction Companies. The Defendants alleged bad faith in handling the claims. The motion was dismissed, the Court finding a genuine issue existed for trial. Zurich Insurance Co. v. Paveco Road Builders Corp., [2009] O.J. No. 1211, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, March 23, 2009, T.R. Lederer ...
