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

A Landlord’s Insurer was not entitled to bring a subrogated claim against a Tenant to recover the amounts paid out on the Landlord’s claim following a fire caused by the Tenant’s negligence where the Tenant paid the Landlord’s insurance premium as additional rent under the lease.

The case reference is: Alberta Importers and Distributers (1993) Inc. v. Phoenix Marble Ltd. [2006] A.J. No. 1514, the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Clark J.  November 30, 2006.

Here is a link to the decision.

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

The Court held that Disability Level Two payments received by the Plaintiff from the government were a form of income replacement and were deductible from a past wage loss award.

 Kerpan v. Insurance Corp. of British Columbia [2006] B.C.J. No. 3079.   British Columbia Supreme Court.  Shaw J.  November 30, 2006.

Here is a link to the decision.

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

The Application by an Insured for an Order requiring the Insurer to assume the cost of the appointment of independent counsel to represent the Insured in respect of risk of liability in excess of the policy limits was dismissed where there was no reason to conclude that the Insurer would admit any damages in excess of policy limits.

The case reference is: Theriault v. ING Insurance Co. of Canada [2006] N.B.J. No. 521, the New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, P.S. Creaghan J.  November 29, 2006.

Here is a link to the decision.

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

The Plaintiffs’ vehicle was stolen and the motor vehicle insurer denied their claim on the basis that they made material and wilful misrepresentations. The Court found that the Plaintiffs had made wilful and material representations and their claim was therefore forfeited.

Here is a link to the decision.

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

The Insurer sought a declaration that it had no duty to defend the Insured against an action in which the plaintiff alleged that a negligently loaded ladder flew off of a truck, causing him injury. The Court held that the loading of the ladder constituted a use or operation of an automobile, such that it came within the ambit of a motor vehicle liability policy, and was therefore excluded in accordance with an exclusionary clause of the commercial general liability policy.

Here is a link to the decision.

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

On appeal from the Motions Court Judge, the Ontario Court of Appeal restored the Arbitrator’s decision finding that the Insured was not "principally dependent" on his mother for "care" as those terms were defined in a Regulation to the Ontario Insurance Act.

Here is a link to the decision.

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

The Insurer settled a motor vehicle claim and then sought reimbursement from the Insured on the basis of section 258(1) of the Insurance Act of Ontario. The Court held that the Insured was not required to reimburse the Insurer under the section, because the section required a judgment against the Insured, not merely a settlement.

Here is a link to the decison.

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

The Insured sustained various injuries in a 1994 accident when he was crushed against the rear of a van by a forklift. Within 30 days of the accident, the Insured retained a lawyer. However, the lawyer did not request a legal opinion concerning the Insured’s claim until 1996. A claim on behalf of the Insured for statutory accident benefits was made thereafter to the Insurer, who had no prior knowledge of the accident. The Insurer rejected the claim as being out of time.

Here is a link to the decision.

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