British Columbia Insurance Blog : Canada Insurance Lawyer & Attorney : Michael Thomas of Harper Grey Law Firm : British Columbia, Vancouver

The Court held that the insurer was not liable under s. 132 of the Ontario Insurance Act with respect to a damage award which had been returned unsatisfied as against its insured. The insured’s lack of co-operation with the insurer in not responding to the insurer’s letters amounted to a substantial and material breach of the insurance policy.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Where an Insured is involved in a single vehicle motor vehicle accident and is found to have a blood alcohol level of 300 mg of ethyl alcohol in 100 milliliters of blood; absent any reasonable explanation for the accident, the Insured will be found to have been operating his motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol and his automobile insurance will be void.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The insured Plaintiff and driver of a vehicle with an expired owner’s certificate was entitled to an Order that ICBC indemnify her in a separate action pursuant to s. 49(1) of the Revised Regulation (1984) because s. 1(3) of the Regulation states that a reference to an owner’s certificate is a reference to a valid and subsisting owner’s certificate.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Court ordered the underinsurer to pay the Insured’s costs once the primary insurer’s policy limits were exhausted because to do otherwise would mean the underinsurer could have a free ride of a trial at the expense of the primary insurer.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Insured was entitled to indemnification under his comprehensive automobile insurance coverage where his parked car was struck by a moving vehicle. The court held that the Insured’s parked vehicle was not involved in a "collision with" the moving vehicle and, therefore, the collision exclusion in the comprehensive policy was not applicable.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The incorporation of language similar to the mandatory fire peril statutory condition in an all-risks policy does not mean the policy is "subject to a limitation provision in another enactment" for the purposes of determining whether an amendment to the pleadings is permissible under the Limitations Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. L-12.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Insured operator of a towing facility ("Diamond Auto") was not entitled to recover damages for business interruption loss after a fire where the evidence was insufficient to support this claim.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Court considered the indemnity and defence obligations of an insurer under a project professional liability policy and held that: the practice policies of the insureds were required to be disclosed to the insurer on a confidential basis; payment for covered claims should be made according to the first-come, first-served principle until the Policy limits were exhausted; and that the insurer required the consent only of the insured making the claim for coverage which was the subject of a recommended settlement, rather than the consent of all of the insureds.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link