Harper Grey, Author at Canadian Insurance Law Blog - Page 40 of 58

Commonwealth Insurance (“Commonwealth”) was successful in appealing a trial decision allowing Skuratow’s claim for the replacement value of his missing truck and trailer where the Court found that Skuratow made wilfully false statements to Commonwealth’s adjuster which were material to the claim

24. October 2005 0

Posted by Harper Grey

Skuratow v. Commonwealth Insurance Co., [2005] B.C.J. No. 2257, British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal confirmed that it was an error to appoint an arbitrator to determine whether the underinsured motorist protection scheme of the Insurance (Motor Vehicle) Act applied where there had been no determination of liability nor proof of inability to satisfy the judgment

21. October 2005 0

Posted by Harper Grey

Beauchamp v. Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, [2005] B.C.J. No. 2218, British Columbia Court of Appeal

An Insured under a Directors and Officers Liability Policy (“Alofs”) was entitled to a defence for claims relating to the time period after he ceased to be a director, where the Court found the claim did allege a breach of duty of disclosure in the discharge of Alofs’ duties as a director

12. October 2005 0

Posted by Harper Grey

Alofs v. Temple Insurance Co., [2005] O.J. No. 4372, Ontario Superior Court of Justice

The Court held that the damage by shipworms to the insured’s wooden-hulled vessel was considered “ordinary wear and tear” and was not occasioned by a “peril of the sea”

07. October 2005 0

Posted by Harper Grey

566935 BC Ltd. (c.o.b. West Coast Resorts) v. Allianz Insurance Co. of Canada, [2005] B.C.J. No. 2145, British Columbia Supreme Court

The Court held that the primary insurer was the insurer of the vehicle in which the deceased was an occupant at the time of the accident. The Court held that the $1 million underinsured motorist protection limit was the global amount available to satisfy the claims of the three plaintiffs.

30. September 2005 0

Posted by Harper Grey

Mazur v. Citadel General Assurance Co., [2005] B.C.J. No. 2061, British Columbia Supreme Court

The Court held that due to ambiguity in the language of the policy, “in transit” coverage was included in the insurance policy. The Court also held that the insurer was negligent in failing to provide the insurance coverage applied for by the insured. The agents were negligent in failing to advise the insured of the lesser coverage. The insured was not contributorily negligent in failing to read the policy of insurance.

27. September 2005 0

Posted by Harper Grey

Audio Works Production Services Ltd. v. Canadian Northern Shield Insurance Co., [2005] M.J. No. 348, Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench

The Court held that Manitoba was the forum conveniens with respect to the interpretation of an umbrella insurance policy issued by an American insurance company

20. September 2005 0

Posted by Harper Grey

Whirlpool Canada Co. v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, PA, [2005] M.J. No. 332, Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench

On a motion for partial summary judgment to dismiss the subrogated portion of the Plaintiffs’ claims brought by the Plaintiffs’ insurer, the Court extended the “anti-subrogation rule” to prevent the insurer from advancing such a claim against its own insured under a separate policy of insurance

16. September 2005 0

Posted by Harper Grey

Lacombe v. Don Phillips Heating Ltd., [2005] O.J. No. 3936, Ontario Superior Court of Justice

An Insurer is entitled to recover from the driver of a motor vehicle monies paid out under a policy of insurance for the damages caused to that motor vehicle where it is determined that the driver was driving “while not authorized by law”

16. September 2005 0

Posted by Harper Grey

Certas Direct Insurance v. Strifler, [2005] O.J. No. 4293, Ontario Superior Court of Justice

Previous
1
…
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
…
58
Next

Search Anything