The owner of a chain of grocery stores (the "Insured") was successful in recovering from its insurer (the "Commonwealth"), losses relating to its perishable food inventory where the court held that a Province-wide blackout was the "direct and proximate cause" of the losses.
Continue Reading...The Court held that damage to shipments of laminated truck flooring was not caused by "inherent vice or nature of the subject matter insured", which was an excluded peril under the policy.
Continue Reading...The Court held that because the landlord did not covenant to insure the property, the landlord’s insurer was entitled to bring a subrogated claim as against the tenant for damages allegedly caused by the negligence of the tenants.
Continue Reading...This is the appeal of a trial finding that an insurer was liable to indemnify the insured owner of a trailer when an uninsured tractor pulling the trailer was involved in a fatal collision. At issue was whether the trial judge erred in his application of the Amos decision of the Supreme Court of Canada, and/or in his interpretation of that decision. The Court of Appeal upheld the trial decision, albeit with different reasoning, and held that there was a causal relationship between the use of the trailer and the collision triggering a duty to indemnify.
Continue Reading...The Ontario Court of Appeal held that the inclusion of the word "indirectly" in the phrase "directly or indirectly from the use or operation of an automobile" in the endorsement on the policy created a more relaxed causation requirement than the causation test enunciated by the Supreme Court of Canada in Amos v. Insurance Corp. of British Columbia.
Continue Reading...This is the appeal of a judgment by the motions court holding that an excess insurer was required to contribute pro rata to defence costs incurred by a primary insurer in defending an action where the claim was settled. The Appeal court reversed in part, holding that the excess insurer was responsible to contribute only to costs incurred after it had definitive notice that a judgment could exceed the policy limits of the primary insurer.
Continue Reading...Enter keywords:
