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

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

The commercial general liability insurer (“Co-Operators”) of Matthews Pallet Recycling (“Matthews Pallet”) was successful in appealing a decision holding that it had a duty to defend claims advanced by passengers of an automobile involved in an accident with a truck owned by Matthews Pallet. The Court of Appeal held that allegations of “negligent business practices” and “negligent repair” were not sufficient to take the claims outside of the exclusion clause in the Co-Operators policy for claims arising out of ownership, use or operation of an automobile.

01. December 2003 0
Unger (Litigation guardian of) v. Unger, [2003] O.J. No. 4587, Ontario Court of Appeal

The Insurers of a fish plant were unable to prove that the fire which destroyed the plant was arson nor that the Insured had committed any acts which would vitiate the policies. The Insured was therefore entitled to the damages proven. The Insurer’s conduct, however, did not warrant an award of punitive damages.

19. November 2003 0
Bay Bulls Sea Products Ltd. v. Insurance Corp. of Newfoundland Ltd., [2003] N.J. No. 282, Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court – Trial Division