If an insurer advises an insured that they will defend a claim, the insurer cannot later refuse to defend the claim

16. February 2008 0
A girl was injured in an ATV accident on an insured property.  The insurer advised their insured that they would defend the claim.  Five months later, they changed their mind and advised their insureds that they would not defend the claim.  Economical Insurance Company brought an application for a declaration that they did not have to ...

A builder’s risk policy provides coverage to an entire structure, even if the builder is only providing an extension to a large existing structure

29. January 2008 0
When a contractor expands an existing structure, the contractor’s insurance extends to the entire existing structure, such that an explosion caused by a contractor working on the expansion, that damages the existing the structure, is covered by the contractor’s insurance. Medicine Hat College v. Starks Plumbing & Heating Ltd., [2007] A.J. No. 1337, Alberta Court ...

Ontario automobile insurers have a right to ask a wide range of questions from an insured pursuant to their contract of insurance. These rights continue even when litigation has been commenced against them by their insured.

27. January 2008 0
Mr. Baig insured his car.  It was damaged and he made a claim of insurance.  The insurer refused to pay the claim so Mr. Baig commenced an action against his insurer to compel payment.  The insurer attempted to examine Mr. Baig pursuant to Statutory Condition 6(4) of the policy of insurance.  Mr. Baig refused to ...

In determining whether an insurer has an obligation to defend an insured, the court may not look beyond the pleadings. A court should not look beyond the pleadings if the extrinsic evidence is contentious and may effect the underlying action.

25. January 2008 0
A general contractor had a commercial general liability insurance that contained a clause that excluded coverage for property damage caused by the general contractor.  The property being developed suffered substantial damages and the developer sued the general contractor and a number of sub contractors.  A contentious issue was whether one of defendants was a sub ...

A go-kart is not an automobile. Car insurance does not provide coverage to an insured involved in a go-kart accident.

20. January 2008 0
A man insured under a standard Ontario automobile insurance policy injured his son while go-karting. His son sued him and the operator of the go-kart track for injuries suffered in the accident.  The father sued his automobile insurer for coverage under his automobile policy.  A motion’s judge determined that a go-kart did not constitute an ...

CPP disability benefits and CPP dependent child benefits may be deductible from benefits received under a disability insurance policy

14. January 2008 1
Two Insureds failed in an action against their private disability insurer claiming that it was wrong for the Insurer to have offset their children’s Canada Pension Plan (“CPP”) benefits against the Long Term Disability (“LTD”) benefits received by the Plaintiffs under the Policies. Ruffolo v. Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada, [2007] O.J. No. 4541, ...

An insurer may recover all funds paid to an insured through subrogation, even if the insured does not recover all of the funds paid to her from the tortfeasor in the underlying lawsuit

10. January 2008 0
The Insured was unsuccessful in her appeal of the decision of the Summary Trial Judge finding that she was required to repay the Saskatchewan Health-Care Association (the “Association”) for disability benefits she had received under the Plan administered by the Association.  The insured claimed that her lawyer was in conflict of interest because he represented ...

A duty to defend is a contractual right/obligation. An insured does not have a prima facie right to a defence under his or her insurance policy.

08. January 2008 0
The Court dismissed the applications of the Insured Company and its two principal shareholders for declaratory relief and an Order that the Third and Fourth Excess Insurers be required to pay defence costs incurred in Third Party actions and proceedings brought against the Company.  A duty to defend is entirely contractual and a party may ...

Allegations that a motor vehicle accident arose from the failure of a company to institute appropriate training and screening mechanisms for drivers, trigger a duty to defend under the company’s CGL policy

01. January 2008 0
The court’s determination of whether all claims pled are covered by an automobile exclusion is fact driven. Where the pleadings give rise to the possibility that a plaintiff’s injuries are caused by a corporation’s policies and failure to screen drivers’ driving records, that claim may be independent of the claim involving the use or operation ...