We have learned that yesterday’s Update on Branco v. Allianz erroneously referred to Allianz as the defendant. In fact, we now understand that Allianz was the AB carrier and although it had been a defendant originally, it was out of this litigation by 2003. The tort defendant that was successful at trial was “Epshtein”. Thanks to David Fournier of Allianz for alerting us to this.Also, some subscribers have had difficulty accessing the text of the decision. If you click on the hyperlink above, you will be taken to the case on the Internet. This particular decision has a lot of white space at the top of it, for some reason, but if you scroll down a ways, you’ll come to it.
Similar Posts
Late Notice of U.S. Trademark Infringement Claim Means No Insurance Coverage for Related Claim in Canada
Mr. Justice Roydon J. Kealey of the Superior Court has granted summary judgment, dismissing the plaintiff’s action in Ideal Roofing Company v. Royal & SunAlliance Insurance Company. Our office acted for Royal, the successful moving party. The basis of the…
Upon Payment of Policy Limits, Insurer No Longer Owes Duty to Defend
In a very significant decision, released yesterday, Justice Harrison Arrell has ruled that an automobile insurer that had paid its policy limits plus costs no longer owed any duty to defend its insured. In Dominion of Canada v. Kingsway Insurance,…
Court Says Successful Threshold Defence Not to be Taken Into Account for Purposes of Costs
In Dennie v. Hamilton, the defendants’ solicitor probably thought that the trial had gone pretty well (see our previous post about this case). In this MVA action, the plaintiff had claimed damages of about $1 million. At the end…
Tort Insurer Can’t Call AB Doctors as Experts
In an important new decision, Mr. Justice J. Patrick Moore has refused to allow the defendant in a personal injury action to adduce expert testimony from three physicians who examined the plaintiff in connection with a claim for statutory accident…
SABS Insurer Examination Doesn’t Preclude IME
Ottawa Case Management Master Robert Beaudoin recently clarified the law relating to the effect that an insurer examination under the SABS has on the right to an IME under s. 105 of the Courts of Justice Act .In La Forest…
Brak v. Walsh (New Threshold Decision)
A decision dealing with the Insurance Act threshold was released this afternoon by Superior Court Justice Gordon Killeen, in Brak v. Walsh. Justice Killeen found that, in this case, the threshold had not been met. This was a motor vehicle case…