Ontario court dismisses insurer’s application for order compelling insured to undergo neuropsychological testing

10. February 2017 0
The insurer’s application for an order compelling the insured to undergo neuropsychological testing was dismissed as neuropsychological or cognitive function had not been put at issue and no treatment providers or experts had recommended it. Insurance law – Practice – Examination for discovery; Disability insurance – Medical examination; Policies and insurance contracts – Coverage Woolsey ...

Disabled employee not entitled to payments until age 65 despite insurer’s previous agreement to continue paying outside of contract of insurance

10. February 2017 0
The insurer’s agreement to continue paying disability benefits to a previously disabled employee did not amount to a contract of insurance obligating the insurer to continue payments until age 65 after the insurer ceased acting as the employer’s insurance provider. Insurance law – Actions – Disability insurance – Long term disability – Future benefits – ...

BC court affirms the insurer’s obligation to save harmless the insured from the costs of defending the action encompasses third-party proceedings

14. December 2016 0
Where the insurer denies coverage and the insured is forced to bring third party proceedings to enforce the insurer’s obligations under the policy, the court will award the insured complete indemnity for both defence costs already incurred and the costs of enforcing compliance. Insurance law – Actions – Duty to defend – Third parties – ...

Trickery and fraud exclusion clause of homeowner’s policy applied: coverage was denied for fraudulent scheme

14. December 2016 0
The insured sought coverage under a homeowner policy after suffering a financial loss as a result of her voluntary participation in what turned out to be a fraudulent scheme. The denial was upheld at trial on the basis of the trickery and fraud exclusion. Insurance law – Homeowner’s insurance – Policies and insurance contracts – ...

BC Court of Appeal held that insurer’s settlement demands letter didn’t constitute confirmation of a cause of action

19. September 2016 0
A “without prejudice” letter from an adjuster that invited the insured, who had been injured in a slip and fall, to forward their settlement demands did not constitute confirmation of a cause of action and therefore did not toll the limitation period.  A summary trial decision dismissing the action as statute barred was upheld on ...