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

The Court granted the Plaintiff’s motion on a determination of a question of law after finding that the Plaintiff was not barred by s. 263 of the Insurance Act from advancing a subrogated claim against the Defendant for damages sustained to the Plaintiff’s Camper Trailer, which was not insured by a motor vehicle liability policy while it was being towed.

Here is the citation: Lange v. 882819 Ontario Ltd. (c.o.b. Morrice Trans. Ltd.) [2006] O.J. No. 5468. Ontario Superior Court of Justice. B.T. Granger J. September 15, 2006. 

This decision was originally digested by Steve Vorbrodt and edited by David Pilley.

Here is a link to the decision. 

• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

An insured under a critical illness policy ("Duke") was successful in obtaining judgment against the insurer ("Clarica") for a critical illness benefit of $500,000 where the Court found that generalised symptoms suffered by Duke prior to entering into the policy were not, at that time, associated with Parkinson’s disease such that an exclusion in the policy applied.

Here is the citation: Duke v. Clarica Life Insurance Co. [2007] A.J. No. 404. Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench. Lutz J. April 10, 2007.

This case was originally digested by Jonathan Meadows and edited by David Pilley.

Here is a link to the decision.

• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Court granted an application by the automobile Insurer striking out the Plaintiff’s claim on the grounds it contained no reasonable cause of action after finding that the statutory provision in the Ontario Automobile Policy excluding coverage for an occupant of an automobile operated by a person without the owner’s consent did not contain a knowledge requirement.

Here is the citation: McCauley (Litigation guardian of) v. Blagdon [2006] O.J. No. 5471. Ontario Superior Court of Justice. B.T. Granger J. December 14, 2006. 

 Here is a link to the decision.

• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

An insurer ("ING") was successful in obtaining a declaration that it was not required to defend or indemnify a trucking company ("Schroeder Transport") under either an auto policy or a commercial policy with respect to claims relating to the theft of 26 snowmobiles from one of Schroeder Transport’s trucks.

Here is the citation: Big Freight Systems Inc. v. 421205 Alberta Ltd. (c.o.b. Schroeder Transport and Poul Nielskov Neilsen) [2007] A.J. No. 388. Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench. Veit J. April 3, 2007.

This case was originally digested by Jonathan Meadows and edited by David Pilley.

Here is a link to the decision.

• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

An insured ("Boliden") under a policy of directors and officers liability insurance issued by Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. ("Liberty"), was successful in obtaining an order that Liberty reimburse Boliden for 80% of the defence costs incurred in defending class actions brought by shareholders where the Court found that some of the allegations did not fall within the pollution exclusion clause in the policy.

Here is the citation: Boliden Ltd. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. [2007] O.J. No. 1321. Ontario Superior Court of Justice. J.C. Newbould J. April 3, 2007.

The case was originally digested by Jonathan Meadows and edited by David Pilley.

Here is a link to the decision.

• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Court found that the majority of a dairy farmer’s losses to his milking equipment destroyed as a result of falling debris during Hurricane Juan was excluded from coverage.

Here is the citation: Whidden v. Kings Mutual Insurance Co. [2007] N.S.J. No. 149. Nova Scotia Supreme Court. J.E. Scanlan J. April 4, 2007.

This case was originally digested by Jonathan Meadows and edited by David Pilley.

Here is a link to the decision.

• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks