The Appellant Insurer was not entitled to rely on a ratability clause pertaining to “sue and labour” expenditures as the application of that clause was limited by the policy to specific circumstances which were not present on the facts. Nor did section 79(2) of the Marine Insurance Act apply to reduce the recovery of the Insured since the loss arose from a peril insured against, namely vandalism.
01. March 2004 0
North Coast Sea Products Ltd. v. ING Insurance Co. of Canada,  B.C.J. No. 375, British Columbia Court of Appeal