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

When a stationary vehicle is hit by another vehicle, that damage is caused by a collision and is covered by collision coverage under the British Columbia Automobile legislation.

Here is the case citation ICBC v. Farmer [2007] B.C.J. No. 2379.  British Columbia Supreme Court.  E.M. Myers J.  October 11, 2007.

Here is a link to the decision.

This case was originally summarized by Sarah Swan and originally edited by David Pilley.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Failure to disclose a potential claim constitutes a material non-disclosure in an application for insurance in an errors and ommission insurance policy.

Here is the case citation: Agresso Corp. v. Temple Insurance Co.[2007] B.C.J. No. 2466.  British Columbia Court of Appeal.  L.S.G. Finch C.J.B.C., C.A. Ryan and I.T. Donald JJ.A.  November 21, 2007.

Here is a link to the decision.

This case was originally summarized by Shanti Davies and edited by David Pilley.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

A commercial general liability policy may  include  coverage for materials constructed by a sub-contractor.  This is more likely if the product supplied by the subcontractor is inextricable linked to the building such that it cannot be removed without destroying the building.

Here is the citation: Axa Insurance (Canada) v. Ani-Wall Concrete Forming Inc. [2007] O.J. No. 3989.  Ontario Superier Court of Justice.  P.M. Perell J.  October 18, 2007.

Here is a link to the decision.

This case was originally edited by David Pilley.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Statements of a co-Defendant produced to a Plaintiff will waive privilege over both the statements and the other relevant documents dealing with the subject matter of the statements. 

Here is the case citation: Huntley v. Larkin 2007 NSSC 297.  Nova Scotia Supreme Court.  A.W.D. Pickup J.  October 16, 2007.

Here is a link to the judgement.

This case was originally edited by David Pilley.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Generally a lawyer owes a client a duty of both confidentiality and loyalty.  However, a lawyer also has a right to transfer to another law firm, assuming that appropriate measures are taken to ensure that the lawyer's duties of confidentiality and loyalty are preserved.  A recent case that Terry Robertson, Q.C. and myself argued, Slater Vecchio v. Robertson et al., explored the ability of a lawyer to move from a firm that performed work for an insurer, to a personal injury firm, that commonly represented clients against that same insurer.  One fact that complicated the issue was that the lawyer that transferred to the new law firm was representing a client and his insurer, that were sued by a client represented by the law firm that he moved to.  The lawsuit was ongoing at the time of the transfer.  There was no consent from the former clients.   The law firms where small and the transfered lawyer was, likely, in daily contact, with the lawyer and staff who were prosecuting the action against the transfered lawyer's former clients.

The matter is currently under appeal to the British Columbia Court of Appeal.  Here is a link to the reasons granting leave to appeal, and here is a link to reasons from the British Columbia Court of Appeal  deciding that an appeal from a judge's decision to enjoin a law firm from acting on a file due to a conflict of interest is a matter of practice and requires leave.

Sarah Swan and Sandra Kovacs wrote an article on this issue.

Here is a copy of the article.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In British Columbia an insured is entitled to $1,000,000.00 of uninsured motorist protection. In an action commenced under the Family Compensation Act, the total entitlement to uninsured motorist benefits remains at $1,000,000.00, despite the fact that there may be more than one insured entitled to damages in the action.

Here is the case citation: Lougheed v. Co-operators General Insurance Co. 2007 BCCA 503. British Columbia Court of Appeal.  L.S.G. Finch C.J.B.C., R.E. Levine and P.D. Lowry.  October 18, 2007.

Here is a link to the decision.

This case was originally edited by David Pilley.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks