Insurance companies and their lawyers tend to evaluate the value of claims better than plaintiffs' counsel.

Eighty to 92 percent of all cases settle before trial. A recent study by Kiser, “… An Empirical Study of Decision Making in Unsuccessful Settlement Negotiations”, Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, Volume 5, Issue 3, 551‑591, September 2008, compares settlement offers to trial results in 2,054 cases that went to trial from 2002 to 2005 in the United States. The study indicates that plaintiff go to trial more often than they should, and that defence counsel, generally are better at evalauting claims than plaintiffs.  However, when the defendants make an error in evaluating a claim, they tend to be signficant. 

 

Continue Reading...

A plaintiff who suffers damage due to impecuniosity cannot recover the loss.

Damage that results from a plaintiff's own impecuniosity are not recoverable at law.

Roopam Fashions v. Greenwood General Insurance Agency Inc. 2008 BCPC 254 British Columbia Provincial Court D.G. Sanderson J.P August 8, 2008

Continue Reading...

Past settlements must be deducted from tort awards

The recent British Columbia Court of Appeal decision of Ashcroft v. Dhaliwal 2008 BCCA 352 September 16, 2008, clarifies that past settlements will be deducted from judgements.  The settlement has to be to compensate the plaintiff for a tortious act, and the injury must be related to the injury sustained at trial. 

Continue Reading...

An insurer who intends to exclude coverage on the basis of arson must be able to prove arson with clear and cogent evidence.

An insurer who intends to exclude coverage for fire liability on the basis that the fire was intentionally set must be able to prove the elements of arson with clear and cogent evidence.

Lancer Enterprises Ltd. v. Saskatchewan Government Insurance (c.o.b. SGI Canada) 2008 SKQB 346 Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench J.D. Koch J. September 4, 2008

Continue Reading...

An insured has an ongoing obligation to advise his insurer of relevant information upon the renewal of the policy.

A renewed insurance policy is a new policy for the purpose of determining the policy’s inception date.  An insured has an obligation to advise his insurer of relevant information upon the inception or renewal of the policy.

South Stormont (Township) v. Frank Cowan Co. [2008] O.J. No. 3594 Ontario Superior Court of Justice J. Mackinnon J. January 14, 2008

Continue Reading...

The determination of whether an insured is a member of a household is heaveily influenced by financial dependency.

An arbitrator's decision holding that an injured victim in an automobile accident should receive statutory benefits from his stepfather's insurer was upheld on the basis that the victim was principally dependent upon the stepfather for financial support.

 Gore Mutual Insurance Company v. Co-Operators General Insurance Company [2008] O.J. No. 3603 Ontario Superior Court of Justice P.M. Perell J. September 18, 2008

Continue Reading...