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

The one year limitation period set out in clause 6(c) of the SEF 44 endorsement may start to run only when a judgment or binding settlement legally fixes the amount of those claims. This will often allow an injured person sue later than the ultimate "ten year" statutory section 3(1)(b) of the Limitations Act. Section 7(1) of the Limitations Act expressly allowes that extension. Alternatively, section 647 of the Insurance Act permits the contractual limitation period in the endorsement.

Shaver v. Co-operators General Insurance Co., [2011] A.J. No. 1411, December 15, 2011, Alberta Court of Appeal, C.A. Fraser C.J.A., J.E.L. Côté J.A. and D.C. Read J. (ad hoc)

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

Where an insurer acts as a claims administration service only but makes decisions regarding the adjudication of claims, computation and issuance of benefits it owes a duty to the insured to act in good faith as it was adjudicating claims and benefits. As such, the traditional tort of intentional procurement of breach of contract is broad enough to capture bad faith actions by an adjuster that bring about the rejection of a meritorious claim for insurance benefits.

LeBlanc v. Atlantic Blue Cross Care, [2011] N.B.J. No. 446, December 12, 2011, New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, G.S. Rideout J.

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

The applicants sought a declaration that their home insurer defend them in relation to a claim brought against them. The application was allowed.

Aitken v. Unifund Assurance Co., [2011] O.J. No. 5083, September 29, 2011, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, B. Warkentin J.

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

An application by third parties for an order that their automobile insurer defend them with respect to allegations raised in third party notices. The application was allowed and costs were awarded to the applicants.

Shum Estate v. Dewetter, [2011] A.J. No. 1210, November 2, 2011, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, J.D. Rooke A.C.J.

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

An appeal from an order dismissing applications to strike out third party claims. The appeal was allowed.

Howalta Electrical Services Inc. v. CDI Career Development Institutes Ltd., [2011] A.J. No. 1227, November 15, 2011, Alberta Court of Appeal, J.E.L. Côté, J.D.B. McDonald and B.K. O’Ferrall JJ.A.

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

Summary judgment application by the insurer on the basis that the action was untenable at law. The Court dismissed the motion finding that there was a tenable action, and that there were genuine issues, including the validity of a policy termination, which required a trial.

Ontario (Minister of Finance) v. Traders General Insurance Co. (c.o.b. Aviva Traders) [2011] O.J. No. 3506, July 8, 2011, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, D.S. Gunsolus J.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Share Link