The court relied on grammar and punctuation to conclude a coverage provision was not ambiguous and the plain meaning was that coverage did not apply.

1088437 Ontario Inc. (c.o.b. Northmore Fuels) v. GCAN Insurance Co., [2013] O.J. No. 5407, November 28, 2013, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, J.R. MacKinnon J.

Continue Reading...

Appeal of a finding that the lessee of a vehicle was the "owner" of the vehicle by virtue of the definition of "owner" under the Motor Vehicle Act such that the defendant driver was not an additional insured. Appeal dismissed. Although it was doubtful the lessee was an "owner" under the policy wording, the vehicle was licensed in the lessee's name and the defendant driver was not an additional insured.

Lombard General Insurance Co. of Canada v. Canadian Direct Insurance Inc. [2013] B.C.J. No. 2673, December 5, 2013, British Columbia Court of Appeal, P.D. Lowry, D.M. Smith and E.A. Bennett JJ.A.

Continue Reading...

In Alberta there is no right to jury trial where defendant raises equitable defence.

Coulter v. Co-operators Life Insurance Co., [2013] A.J. No. 919, September 6, 2013, Alberta Court of Appeal, J.E.L. Côté, B.K. O'Ferrall and B.L. Veldhuis JJ.A.

Continue Reading...

Commercial general liability insurer found to owe insured, a construction company, a duty to defend it in respect to a claim by a condominium corporation for alleged construction defects.

Canalta Construction Co. Ltd. v. Dominion of Canada General Insurance Co., [2013] A.J. No. 592, June 3, 2013, Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, V.O. Ouellette J.

Continue Reading...

Application by the insured for reimbursement of legal fees it incurred defending Human Rights Tribunal proceedings. The insured had a "claims made and reported" insurance policy,  and notice of all claims was required no later than 30 days after termination of the policy period. The renewal form completed by the insured for the following year mentioned the Human Rights Tribunal proceedings but a formal claim for coverage was not made until after the 30 day deadline. The insured's application was dismissed because no effective claim was made within the claim period.

Peel Law Assn. v. Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Co. of Canada, [2013] O.J. No. 1844, April 24, 2013, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, M. Donohue J.

Continue Reading...

An applicant sought an order that the respondent indemnify it for defence costs incurred in defending a slip and fall claim. The application was granted.

Georgian Downs Ltd. v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co., [2013] O.J. No. 1719, April 15, 2013, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, G.M. Mulligan J.

Continue Reading...

An executive officer of a company was considered an employee for the purposes of an "employee injury exclusion clause". The court held the wording was not ambiguous, despite its interpretation of the exception leading to the odd result that there could be coverage for employees also covered by workers' compensation legislation, but not for employees falling outside the scope of the legislation.

Sam's Auto Wrecking Co. (c.o.b. Wentworth Metal) v. Lombard General Insurance Co. of Canada, [2013] O.J. No. 1413, March 28, 2013, Ontario Court of Appeal, J.I. Laskin, M. Rosenberg and M.H. Tulloch JJ.A.

Continue Reading...

Subcontractors may not benefit from a third party lease.

Defendant construction company could not benefit from a clause in a lease between the plaintiff lessee and a third party lessor requiring plaintiff to obtain construction insurance to defeat a claim by the plaintiff against the defendant arising out of damage to the plaintiff's building caused by the defendant and its subcontractors.

Bank of Nova Scotia v. Lockerbie & Hole Industrial Inc., [2013] O.J. No. 1167, March 14, 2013, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, E.M. Morgan J.

Continue Reading...

An injured person is unable to obtain uninsured motorist coverage from an insurer solely on the basis of the entitlement to statutory accident benefits from that insurer

A motion was brought by the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund to determine whether Aviva Insurance was obliged to provide uninsured motorist coverage to the plaintiff. The Court determined that the plaintiff was not entitled to uninsured motorist coverage from Aviva.

McKenzie v. Zhang, [2013] O.J. No. 638, February 11, 2013, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, E. Frank J.

Continue Reading...

A lessee with an option to purchase may be an owner

A lessee with an option to purchase a vehicle is an "owner" under s. 1 of the Motor Vehicle Act. Other insurance policies contemplating an "owner" must be read in light of this definition.

Lombard General Insurance Co. of Canada v. Canadian Direct Insurance Inc., [2013] B.C.J. No. 41, January 11, 2013, British Columbia Supreme Court, P.D. Leask J.

Continue Reading...