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

A claim against an insurance broker for the failure to advise about optional coverage. The action was dismissed.

Godina v. Tripemco Burlington Insurance Group Ltd., [2013] O.J. No. 613, February 12, 2013, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, R.B. Reid J.

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

Application for a declaration that pursuant to the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. 1.8 and Ontario’s Standard Automobile Policy (“SAP”) the insurer had no obligation to defend its insured against a claim after paying its policy limits to the plaintiff. The application was dismissed and the insurer was ordered to continue to bear the cost of defending the insured.

Jevco Insurance Co. v. Malaviya, [2013] O.J. No. 394, January 29, 2013, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, E.M. Morgan J.

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

The appeal by an insurance broker ("Meadow-North") from a decision finding it negligent for failing to advise an insured ("Cheecham") with respect to gaps in coverage for a rental property was dismissed where the court upheld the trial judge's decision that the broker should have drawn attention to the vacant vandalism exception as part of its duty to provide counsel and advice.

Meadow-North Agencies Ltd. v. Cheecham, [2012] S.J. No. 762, December 12, 2012, Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, S.J. Cameron, G.R. Jackson and R.G. Richards JJ.A.

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

Parties are presumed to be acquainted with statutory definitions of a common insurance term for the purposes of contractual interpretation where the parties are engaged in the insurance industry. In interpreting an insurance contract, the Court will consider the plain meaning of the phrase in the context of the agreement as a whole and in light of the factual matrix that existed at the time of the parties, including the relevant facts that the parties are taken to have known.

National Home Warranty Programs Ltd. v. Wylie-Crump Ltd., [2012] B.C.J. No. 2011, September 28, 2012, British Columbia Supreme Court, D.J. Dardi J.

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

No coverage for an insured whose property was vandalized while it was vacant due to a vacancy clause. However, the insured was successful in an action against his agent.

Newbigging v. M. Butler Insurance Brokers Ltd. [2012] O.J. No. 4270, September 13, 2012, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, T. Maddalena J.

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

Two insurance companies and an insurance broker were found not to owe a duty to the actual owner of a vehicle to investigate the ownership of a vehicle when approving or issuing an application for insurance.

Barzo v. Chrysler Financial Services Inc., [2011] O.J. No. 5874, December 21, 2011, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, J. Mackinnon J.

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

An insured brought an action against his insurance broker for failing to advise him about the vacancy exclusion in his policy.  The action was allowed and the insured was awarded damages.

Cheecham v. Saskatchewan Government Insurance [2011] S.J. No. 500, August 2, 2011, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, B. Scherman J.

• 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 insured brought a professional negligence claim against a broker and the brokerage firm alleging that the broker misrepresented to the insured that its wholesale inventory was covered by insurance while in storage. The court dismissed the claim finding that the broker was retained only to place specific coverage and that he had fulfilled that duty.

Sandborn Wholesale Ltd. v. Pottruff & Smith Insurance Brokers Inc., [2011] O.J. No. 1690, April 12, 2011, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, B.A. Conway J.

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

The appeal by an insurer ("Ecclesiastical") from a declaration that an insurance broker ("Kouri") had no liability for premiums received for an extension of insurance was allowed where the court held that by unilaterally sending out certificates of insurance, the broker had created valid contracts of insurance.

M.B. Kouri Insurance Brokers Ltd. v. R.L. Gougeon, [2010] O.J. No. 5584, December 22, 2010, Ontario Court of Appeal, J.C. MacPherson, R.G. Juriansz and J.L. MacFarland JJ.A.

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