An application by the insurer for a declaration that it had no duty to defend or indemnify the insured and his son was dismissed in part. There was no coverage for the son, as he was an excluded driver under the policy. Although the son was an ‘excluded driver’ under the policy, the evidence did ...
Axa Insurance Company (‘Axa’) sought a summary judgment to dismiss an action using a limitation period defence filed against it by its insured under unidentified vehicle coverage policy following a 68 vehicle pile-up. The motion for summary judgment was dismissed. Mawji v. Axa Insurance Co., [2009] O.J. No. 3621, September 2, 2009, Ontario Superior Court of ...
The plaintiff argued successfully that s. 267.8(9) of the Insurance Act, R.S.O 1990, c.I.8, (‘the Act’) did not apply to future collateral benefits received after a settlement agreement rather than after a trial of the action. Stokes v. Desjardins Groupe D’Assurances Generales, [2009] O.J. No. 3608, July 17, 2009, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, R.J. ...
The defendant insurer was successful in its motion to appeal a decision allowing the plaintiffs to amend their pleadings to include an uninsured motorist claim over 10 years after the accident. MacGregor v. Royal and Sun Alliance Insurance Co. of Canada, [2009] O.J. No. 3573, June 24, 2009, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, H. MacLeod-Beliveau J.
Two separate actions were heard together in this case. The Builder (“Aspen”) sued for the balance due on a construction contract and the homeowner counterclaimed for defective workmanship and materials. Kingsway General Insurance Company, the homeowner warranty provider (“the Insurer”), sought indemnification from the builder for any sums it was ordered to pay the homeowner under the ...
Application by the insured for coverage under an all-risks policy allowed. Mould was found to be a risk covered under the policy and was not excluded from coverage by any of the provisions. The evidence supported the inference that the loss occurred during the policy period and not prior, as argued by the insurer. Minox ...
The insureds’ application for coverage under their policy for damage to their home during a flood was allowed. The insurer did not meet its onus of establishing that the claim fell within the exclusionary language of damage that occurred “before, during or after flood damage to the premises.” The insureds’ claims for bad faith and ...
Appeal by insured from trial judgment finding that his claim for income benefits was statute barred and not awarding him post-judgment interest according to the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS) was allowed. The amendment of the Statement of Defence did not constitute a refusal to pay an amount claimed within the meaning of s. 71(1) ...
The application by Lombard for an order compelling Zurich to defend and indemnify two defendants in a motor vehicle accident action was dismissed. The car involved in the accident was not covered by Zurich’s insurance policy because the policy required all vehicles be “described” in order to be insured and the car was not listed ...
