Declaration that the insured was entitled to statutory accident benefits after the insured tripped over a parked motorcycle as the temporary parking of the motorcycle was an ordinary well-known activity and the motorcycle operator’s conduct in parking the motorcycle was the direct cause of the insured’s injuries

Insurance law – Automobile insurance – Benefits – Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule – Ownership use or operation of motor vehicle – Chain of causation Economical Mutual Insurance Co. v. Caughy, [2015] O.J. No. 3008, 2015 ONSC 3251, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, June 10, 2015, R.J. Nightingale J. Application by the insurer for a determination ...

Section 263(5)(a.1) of the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c 1.8 allowed the insured to recover property damages in excess of those paid by the insurer from the other driver in a motor vehicle accident pursuant to a handwritten contract where the parties had not agreed to forego their rights to claim under their insurance coverage.

Insurance law – Automobile insurance – Policies and insurance contracts – Actions – Statutory provisions – Contracts – Interpretation – Liability insurance – Motor vehicle accidents – Property damage Hafeez v. Sunaric, [2015] O.J. No. 3286, 2015 ONSC 4065, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, June 23, 2015, P.M. Perell J. The insured was involved in ...

An award of $4.5 million in punitive damages against two insurers was found to be so high as to be irrational and was reduced to a total of $675,000. Similarly, $450,000 in damages for mental distress was too extravagant and was reduced to a total of $45,000.

Insurance law – Accident and sickness insurance – Bad faith – Damages – Punitive damages – Mental distress – Conflict of laws – Choice of law Branco v. American Home Assurance Co., [2015] S.J. No. 286, 2015 SKCA 71, Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, June 19, 2015, R.G. Richards C.J.S., J.G. Lane and M.J. Herauf JJ.A. ...

Motor Vehicle Policy Found Not to be Assignable

Motion for summary judgement brought against the insurer by a plaintiff who claimed to be an assignee of the insured’s automobile policy. The action was dismissed. The policy was not assignable in the circumstances. Alternatively, the policy had not been breached and therefore no cause of action was available to the insured or an assignee. Insurance law ...

Contractual Limitation Period for Claiming Against Excess Motor Vehicle Insurer Runs from Time the Insured Accumulates a Body of Evidence

15. January 2015 0
Contractual limitation period for making a claim against an excess motor vehicle insurer began to run from the time the insured had accumulated a body of evidence which would give him a reasonable chance of demonstrating that his claim exceeded the limits. Further, it was equitable in the circumstances that the insured was granted a ...