Last Friday, the Court of Appeal ruled that the statutory conditions in a standard automobile policy do not apply to the uninsured automobile coverage that is mandated by s. 265 of the Insurance Act. In Bruinsma v. Cresswell, the plaintiff was…
Vogler v. Lemieux, 2012 ONSC 1692 is an interesting case and, to me, a bit puzzling. I am hoping that one of the readers of this blog can clear things up for me. The plaintiff was injured in a single…
The Court of Appeal has handed down a ruling that is important for auto insurers. The Court has held that an injured plaintiff can still sue his or her own insurer, pursuant to an OPCF-44R underinsured motorist endorsement, even after…
Ontario auto insurers received some bad news last week from the Court of Appeal . In Loftus v. Security National Insurance Company, the Court upheld the ruling of Mr. Justice Barry MacDougall, which we reported on a little over a year ago….
In McCook v. Subramaniam, Master Ronald Dash considered whether to permit a plaintiff to add as a defendant his own auto insurer, under its underinsured motorist endorsement. The insurer resisted the motion on the basis that the plaintiff had not…
[Addendum: This decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal on August 21, 2009.] Ontario auto insurers might be surprised to learn that the Insurance Act and the standard auto policy do not require persons claiming against the uninsured motorist coverage to pursue anyone whose negligence…
In this case, Allianz Insurance was unsuccessful in its motion for summary judgment, dismissing a claim under its uninsured motorist coverage. In George v. George, the plaintiff rented a car from the defendant Enterprise-Rent-A-Car. He purchased insurance that included uninsured…
In McArdle v. Bugler, the Court of Appeal today held that a passenger in an uninsured vehicle, which had collided with another vehicle, was entitled to uninsured motorist insurance coverage applying to the second car. It held that the narrow…
In Pilot Insurance Company v. Sutherland, the Court of Appeal (Justices Rosenberg, Gillese and Lang) allowed an appeal from a decision of Madam Justice Margaret Eberhard of the Superior Court. Her Honour had held that a territorial limitation contained in…
In Biancale v. Vieyra, Mr. Justice David Crane dismissed a plaintiff’s motion to add, as a defendant in the proceeding, one of two drivers involved in the accident in which the plaintiff had been injured. The amendment was sought after…