The Court dismissed the claim by an Insurer (“Scottish & York”) against its sub-broker (“Metrix”) for damages arising from a theft of jewellery worth in excessive of $2,000,000. The Court found that Scottish & York failed to prove that the failure by Metrix to communicate the policy warranties to the broker who placed the policy caused or contributed to the loss.

23. June 2006 0
Scottish & York Insurance Co. v. Metrix Professional Insurance Brokers Inc., [2006] B.C.J. No. 1431, British Columbia Supreme Court

The claim by Lumbermen’s Underwriting Alliance (“LUA”) for equitable contribution from AXA Pacific Insurance Co. (“AXA”) in respect of forest fire expenses incurred by LUA’s Insured, Pacific Forest Products (“Pacific”), was dismissed where the Court held that the coverage under the AXA policy was complementary coverage rather than overlapping coverage and did not insure the same risk

22. June 2006 0
Lumbermen’s Underwriting Alliance v. AXA Pacific Insurance Co., [2006] B.C.J. No. 1439, British Columbia Supreme Court

On an application for a Declaration that another insurer share in the costs of the defence of an underlying action, there was nothing in the documentation to specifically identify the contested policy as either a claims-made policy or an occurrence policy. Because more than one reasonable interpretation of the insuring agreement was open, the interpretation favouring the Insured by recognizing a duty to defend resulted and the Declaration was granted.

01. June 2006 0
Lanark Mutual Insurance Co. v. Economical Mutual Insurance Co., [2006] O.J. No. 2173, Ontario Superior Court of Justice