A resort operator that contracted services for snow removal brought an application for declaration that its Insurer is obliged to defend the entire action brought by the Plaintiff relating to the failure to remove snow, and the resort’s negligence in the management and operation of the resort. The insurer refused to provide a separate or additional ...
Manulife, owner of a shopping centre, was a third party in this action. It sought a declaration that the third party Sovereign General Insurance owed a duty to defend in an action commenced against it. Sovereign argued that it did not owe a duty to defend based on Manulife’s position as an occupier, pursuant to the Occupiers ...
The Defendant Temple Insurance Company sought a rectification of the insurance contract it entered into with Concord Pacific regarding a mixed residential and commercial building complex. Temple was successful in that application. Concord Pacific Group Inc. v. Temple Insurance Co., [2009] B.C.J. No. 1141, June 9, 2009, British Columbia Supreme Court, V. Gray J.
The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal overturned the chambers judge’s decision that although proposed amendments to the statement of claim were outside the limitation period, they should nonetheless be allowed pursuant to section 20 of Saskatchewan’s Limitation Act which provides an exception to the normal limitation periods. Cameco Corp. v. Insurance Co. of the State of Pennsylvania, ...
Where one policy number is issued with respect to a number of family automobiles, the overall policy holder is entitled to notice of cancellation of one of the policies. Co-Operators General Insurance Co. v. Carter, [2008] A.J. No. 457, April 22, 2008, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, D.L. Shelley, J.
A “mechanical breakdown or derangement” exclusion in an insurance policy refers to an internal problem or defect in a machine, not an external interruption in the machine’s power supply. Caneast Foods Ltd. v. Lombard General Insurance Co. of Canada, [2008] O.J. No. 1811A, May 9, 2008, Ontario Court of Appeal, M. Rosenberg, S. Borins and ...
In deducting no-fault accident benefits from a tort award in a motor vehicle case, a trial judge must estimate the future value of the benefits based on evidence, and not on representations by trial counsel. McCreight v. Currie, [2008] B.C.J. No. 740, April 3, 2008, British Columbia Court of Appeal, C.M. Huddart, P.D. Lowry and ...
Appeal by Fidelity Insurer from summary judgment in favor of the Insured was allowed. The motion judge should not have decided issues of fact based on evidence that was capable of supporting more than one inference. Genuine issues remained for trial. However, since the interpretation of the bond was a contentious issue and the trial ...
An application by the Insured for a declaration that the Insurer be required to fund defence of the Insured in action brought against it was allowed where the Court held that since part of the claim was covered by the policy, the Insurer’s duty to defend was engaged. Beaverdam Pools Ltd. v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance ...
