Damage from an insured peril to a roof triggered municipal inspections which revealed the strength of the roof in undamaged areas required upgrading. The increased cost of repairing the roof fell within coverage under the bylaw provision. 954470 Alberta Ltd. (c.o.b Centre South) v. Sovereign General Insurance Co., [2016] A.J. No. 293, 2016 ABQB 185, Alberta Court of ...
The exception for resulting damage was read in to the exclusion clause for “the cost of faulty workmanship” where the exclusion clause was silent on the resulting damage. Monk v. Farmers’ Mutual Insurance Co. (Lindsay), [2015] O.J. No. 6849, 2015 ONCA 911, Ontario Court of Appeal, December 23, 2015, K.N. Feldman, E.A. Cronk and G. Huscroft JJ.A.
Despite language indicative of the “material contribution” causation test, the legal causation test for statutory accident benefits is the “but for” test. Kozhikhov v. Insurance Corp. of British Columbia, [2015] B.C.J. No. 2785, 2015 BCCA 515, British Columbia Court of Appeal, December 17, 2015, M.E. Saunders, D.M. Smith, and A.W. MacKenzie JJ.A.
A contractual one year limitation period which began to run from the date the “loss or damage” occurred applied to bar an insured’s action against an insurer seeking a declaration that it owed the insured a defence. Daverne v. John Switzer Fuels Ltd., [2015] O.J. No. 6853, 2015 ONCA 919, Ontario Court of Appeal, December 24, 2015, A. Hoy A.C.J.O., ...
An insurer was obligated to pay for the increased cost of repairs due to the additional work required under the Building Code. The relevant exclusion clause did not apply because it only excluded repairs relating to “by-laws” and the Building Code was not considered a “by-law”. Choukair v. Allstate Insurance Co. of Canada, [2015] O.J. ...
A subrogated claim against an individual and corporate entities was dismissed after the court found both the defendants and the plaintiff were the common employers of the individual who actually started the fire. Shamac Country Inns Ltd. v. Sandy’s Oilfield Hauling Ltd., [2015] A.J. No. 905, August 17, 2015, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, Master ...
A covenant to insure operated to bar a subrogated claim against a subcontractor. A subcontractor was also considered an unnamed insured even though the policy did not contain any wording expanding the definition of an insured beyond that of the named insured. DCMS GP (Dufferin-Steeles) Inc. v. Caribbean Tower Cranes Ltd., [2015] O.J. No. 4364, ...
An insurer cannot rely on the common law concept of an insurable interest to deny coverage for statutory insurance. Young v. Saskatchewan Government Insurance, [2015] S.J. No. 207, April 30, 2015, Saskatchewan Provincial Court, D.J. Kovatch Prov. Ct. J.
Where an insurer insures both the tortfeasor for liability coverage and the victim for accident benefits, the insurer should set up a firewall so that information gathered by it regarding the accident benefits claim is not available in the tort action. Dervisholli v. Cervenak, [2015] O.J. No. 2076, April 24, 2015, Ontario Superior Court of ...
