Attached is a copy of Justice Lally’s reasons in Blight v. AXA and Royal & SunAlliance, decided last Friday in Belleville. The court ruled that there was no liability coverage under a tenant’s insurance policy for a fire that broke…
In Doyle v. Petrolia, released a few minutes ago, the Court of Appeal has reaffirmed the principle, that occupiers of property are not insurers. The Occupier’s Liability Act does not require that occupiers of property guard against every possible risk,…
This afternoon, the Court of Appeal released its decision in Avis Rent-A-Car System Inc. v. Certas Direct Insurance Company. The ruling is an important one for car rental companies and their insurers. The Court held that a renter of a car…
Last week, the Court of Appeal released a decision that addressed a recurring issue: “when will an excess insurer be required to contribute to defence costs incurred by a primary insurer in defending an action against a common insured?” It…
Lahay v. Henderson arose out of an MVA which left the plaintiff with soft tissue injuries, principally to his back. Liability was admitted. The trial judge ruled that the plaintiff, a manual labourer before the accident, would never be able…
The Supreme Court of Canada has today released an interesting decision in which it has reaffirmed the standard of review to be applied by appellate courts in Canada : “palpable and overriding error”. In H.L. v. Canada (Attorney General), the…
The “discoverability” principle does not permit a limitation period to be extended where a plaintiff delays suing because she does not, at first, realize the seriousness of her injury. This is what the Divisional Court ruled in Smith v. Toronto.In…
In Hussain v. Uddin, Mr. Justice Gerald F. Day has taken the somewhat unusual step of granting a defence motion for summary judgment in an action arising out of a motor vehicle accident. The moving defendants, Mr. and Mrs. Noack,…
Two decisions of importance to the personal injury bar and the insurance industry were released by the Court of Appeal this afternoon. They are Vollick v. Sheard and Walker v. Ritchie. Both cases involved the issue of whether an owner…
Today’s case isn’t particularly earth-shattering, but it’s of some interest to students of tort law. The case is Mustapha v. Culligan of Canada Ltd. (reasons for judgment attached, courtesy of Mr. Justice Thomas Granger of the Ontario Superior Court). The…