Harper Grey, Author at Canadian Insurance Law Blog - Page 56 of 58

The Defendant Insurer was entitled to rely on an exclusion clause which excluded from coverage property damage occurring after the subject premises had been vacant for more than 30 consecutive days. The extended vacancy also constituted a material change in the risk assumed by the Insurer of which they ought to have received notice.

19. January 2004 0

Posted by Harper Grey

Wright v. Capri Insurance Services Ltd., [2004] B.C.J. No. 383, British Columbia Supreme Court

The vacancy of a residence constitutes a material change in risk in a policy of home insurance, and the insurance policy is voided by the failure of the insured to notify of the change in risk upon vacating the premises. The policy is void whether the policy is payable in favour of the insured, or a third party, such as a bank with a mortgage in trust in the property.

15. January 2004 0

Posted by Harper Grey

Royal Bank of Canada v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co., [2004] O.J. No. 91, Ontario Court of Appeal

Indemnity for automobile damage is not restricted to damages arising from a collision, but also includes damages that arise from the use and operation of a motor vehicle

07. January 2004 0

Posted by Harper Grey

Redmond v. West Wawanosh Mutual Insurance Co., [2004] O.J. No. 110, Ontario Superior Court of Justice

This was an appeal by the Plaintiff Credit Union from a summary trial judgment dismissing the claim. The trial judge held that the credit union’s loss from credit card fraud was not covered by its indemnity for “securities” as defined in the master bond policy issued by the Respondent insurers. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that credit card receipts fell within the definition of securities as “drafts”.

30. December 2003 0

Posted by Harper Grey

North Shore Credit Union v. Cumis General Insurance Co., [2003] B.C.J. No. 2923, British Columbia Court of Appeal

This was an appeal by the Insurance Corp. from British Columbia (“ICBC”) of a trial decision lifting a stay of execution on a judgment obtained by Mr. Hosseini against ICBC. The Plaintiff/Respondent was successful in an action against ICBC. He was also the Defendant in a related but separate action brought by ICBC, seeking contribution to a settlement made on his behalf. ICBC was successful at trial in imposing a stay of execution on the judgment against ICBC, pending resolution of the action for contribution. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal holding that there was no basis in law to allow ICBC to seek to set off what it must pay, by any sum it may in due course be adjudged entitled to recover.

22. December 2003 0

Posted by Harper Grey

Hosseini-Nejad v. Insurance Corp. of British Columbia, [2003] B.C.J. No. 2887, British Columbia Court of Appeal

This was an appeal by an insured from the decision that the insurer had no duty to defend him in an action for defamation under the terms of a homeowner’s policy. The Court of Appeal upheld the reasons of the chambers judge, relying on the “intentional act” exclusion.

17. December 2003 0

Posted by Harper Grey

Hodgkinson v. Economical Mutual Insurance Co., [2003] O.J. No. 5125, Ontario Court of Appeal

The Insured Lessor was not entitled to coverage when it received notice that the Lessee of the leased vehicle had discontinued full liability and collision coverage on the vehicle which was damaged in an accident

15. December 2003 0

Posted by Harper Grey

Transportation Lease Systems Inc. v. Guarantee Co. of North America, [2003] O.J. No. 5237, Ontario Superior Court of Justice

The Plaintiff mortgagee was entitled to judgment against the Defendant Insurer pursuant to a Standard Mortgage Clause which remained in force notwithstanding any act or neglect of the mortgagor

15. December 2003 0

Posted by Harper Grey

Healy v. Pilot Insurance Co., [2003] O.J. No. 5165 Ontario Superior Court of Justice

The Minister of Finance was successful in appealing a decision allowing an Ontario resident (“Young”) to collect no fault statutory accident benefits under a Fund created by the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M.41. The court held that Part VI of the Ontario Insurance Act did not apply as the accident occurred in New Mexico and Young’s insurance policy, purchased in New Mexico, did not need to comply with the mandatory coverage provisions of Ontario’s Compulsory Automobile Insurance Act.

11. December 2003 0

Posted by Harper Grey

Young v. Ontario (Minister of Finance), [2003] O.J. No. 4832

Search Anything