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

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.

Continue Reading...

Beattie v. National Frontier Insurance Co. [2003] O.J. No. 4258 Ontario Court of Appeal

In Ontario, an insured charged with one of the driving offences enumerated in the legislation is not entitled to statutory accident benefits. Paradoxically, upon conviction of that offence the insured is entitled to statutory accident benefits.

Continue Reading...

Svishchov v. Corol [2003] O.J. No. 4745 Ontario Superior Court of Justice

The same person cannot act as defence counsel and as counsel in a third party action against the Insurer which alleges bad faith pertaining to a failure to defend and, potentially, the conduct of a legal proceeding.

Continue Reading...

Luangphasi v. Good [2003] A.J. No. 1394 Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Manitoba automobile insurance purchased by a non-resident of Manitoba is void ab initio, when it is purchased fraudulently by an out of province automobile owner in an attempt to obtain cheaper automobile insurance.

Continue Reading...

Goertzen v. Halifax Insurance Co. [2003] M.J. No. 399 Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench

A broker is liable for any gaps in insurance that are not brought to the client’s attention, if the client would have taken steps to avoid an uninsured loss. The fact that the client had been provided a copy of the policy that contained the exclusions, but had not read the policy, does not entitle the broker to claim contributory negligence against the client.

Continue Reading...