In Zimmerman v. Royal & SunAlliance Insurance Company, Mr. Justice Barry Matheson agreed that an insurer was entitled to deny coverage under a homeowner’s policy where the premises had been vacant for about 65 days. The home had been damaged…
Decision of Justice Kershman dated Aug 10, 2007.pdf Our office acted for the insured in what is, so far as we can determine, the first decision to consider whether a duty to defend was owed by an insurer whose policy…
It was a good day for Barry Percival, who had cast aside the defence hat that he usually wears and was acting for the plaintiff. In Sagl v. Cosburn, Griffiths & Brandham et al., an action by a policyholder against…
In Kourtesis v. Joris, Mr. Justice Edward R. Brown dismissed an action for damages arising out of a motor vehicle accident that occurred during the “Bill 59” regime of the Insurance Act. He held that the plaintiff’s chronic pain injuries…
Mr. Justice David M. Brown hasn’t been a judge for very long (he was appointed to the Superior Court on September 14, 2006). Maybe he hasn’t lost his sense of humour. Or maybe the opposite is true: the job is…
In McKenzie v. Dominion of Canada General Insurance Company, released today, the Court of Appeal clarified the law with respect to overlapping insurance coverage and the order in which liability insurance policies must respond to a claim. In the Supreme…
In Williams v. York Fire & Casualty Insurance Company, released today by the Court of Appeal, the court was dealing with a fact situation that often comes up. A driver was involved in an accident. When the accident occurred, the…
In 539091 Ontario Ltd. v. Allianz Insurance, Madam Justice Helen Pierce was dealing with various proposed amendments to the statement of claim in a fire insurance case. The motion raised several interesting issues but of particular note was the request of…
In The Co-operators General Insurance Company v. Murray et al., Mr. Justice Robert MacKinnon ruled that a homeowner’s insurance policy did not cover a claim that the insureds failed to supervise their son, who had been the driver in a single-car accident….
Garisto v. Wang is one of relatively few cases in which a trial judges has imposed the costs penalties contained in Rule 76 of the Rules of Civil Procedure. The plaintiff had originally sought damages of $800,000 in this car accident…