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

An inspection services company ("CIA") was successful in its action against Dan Lawrie Insurance Brokers ("DLIB") where the Court found that DLIB had failed to obtain adequate insurance coverage for CIA's custom equipment while on the job site.

CIA Inspection Inc. v. Dan Lawrie Insurance Brokers, [2010] O.J. No. 3313, August 4, 2010, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, A.C.R. Whitten J. 

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

The motion for summary judgment by a mall owner ("Cadillac Fairview") was dismissed where the Court found that the allegations in a slip and fall action did not require the cleaning service at the mall ("Olympia") to assume the defence of Cadillac Fairview in the entire action.

Cadillac Fairview Corp. v. Olympia Sanitation Products Inc., [2010] O.J. No. 3306, August 3, 2010, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, G.P. DiTomaso

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

British Columbia Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction to deal with dispute as to quantum between Plaintiff Insured and Defendant ICBC.

476605 B.C. Ltd. v. Insurance Corp. of British Columbia, [2010] B.C.J. No. 1608, August 13, 2010, British Columbia Supreme Court, C.J. Ross J.

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

A decision under s. 79(1) of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Act must be appealed to the Court of Queen's Bench.

Constantin v. Manitoba Public Insurance Corp., [2010] M.J. No. 254, August 20, 2010, Manitoba Court of Appeal, F.M. Steel and A.D. MacInnes JJ.A. and H.C. Beard J. (ad hoc)

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

Insured was entitled to no-fault benefits under the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Act following an accident involving a golf cart.

Hruska v. Bridges Golf Club Ltd. (c.o.b. Bridges Golf Course), [2010] M.J. No. 257, August 18, 2010, Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, B.L. Keyser J.

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

Ontario Court of Appeal upholds arbitrator's decision as to which insurer had an obligation to pay benefits to an insured claimant.

Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Co. v. Lombard Canada, [2010] O.J. No. 3617, May 27, 2010, Ontario Court of Appeal, J.C. MacPherson, E.E. Gillese and R.A. Blair JJ.A.

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

Insurer had duty to defend occupier of a shopping mall as an unnamed insured under the snow removal contractor's insurance policy.

Cadillac Fairview Corp. v. Oakridge Landscape Contractors, [2010] O.J. No. 3480, August 17, 2010, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, J.A. Ramsay J.

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

Forms submitted by chiropractor amounted to an application for insurance by the insureds.

ING Insurance Co. of Canada. v. TD Insurance Meloche Monnex, [2010] O.J. No. 3549, August 24, 2010, Ontario Court of Appeal, E.E. Gillese, R.G. Juriansz and H.S. LaForme JJ.A.

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

Appeal by the insured from the trial judge’s decision finding no coverage under an automobile policy was allowed. The judge interpreted the terms of the automobile policy too narrowly. A broad interpretation of the words “hit or struck by” entitled the insured to coverage for her injuries, which were sustained when she walked into a steel pole protruding from a parked vehicle. The legislature did not intend to exclude coverage for injuries resulting from contact with stationary automobiles. There is precedent for extending coverage to persons not in any literal sense struck or hit by automobiles.

Lewis v. Economical Insurance Group, [2010] O.J. No. 3158, July 26, 2010, Ontario Court of Appeal, J.I. Laskin, K.N. Feldman and E.E. Gillese JJ.A.

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