Having trouble reading this email? You can view it in your web browser
|
You're receiving this newsletter because you signed up at harpergrey.com. Having trouble reading this email? You can view it in your web browser |
 |
|||
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|||
|
About this newsletterThe Harper Grey LLP Insurance Law Update provides a monthly review of new cases and emerging issues in Canadian insurance law. These summaries are not legal opinions. Readers should not act on the basis of these summaries without first consulting a lawyer for analysis and advice on a specific matter. |
||
Automobile insuranceNo-fault coverage - Limitation of actions; Practice - Parties to action - Adding a party The claim arose as a result of a motor vehicle accident in British Columbia involving a rental vehicle owned by U-Haul (Canada) Ltd. which was insured under a policy entered into in Arizona with the out-of-province insurer. |
|||
Commercial general liability insuranceCoverage - Exclusions - Product liability - Accidental product contamination - definition; Policies and insurance contracts - Interpretation of policy - Contra proferentum rule - Terms of policy Successful application by the insured for a determination of whether the policy covered losses for product recall and destruction of sandwich products. |
|||
Homeowner's insuranceMulti-peril policy - Statutory conditions; Policies and insurance contracts - Material non-disclosure - Renewals of policies - Breach of policy - Statutory provisions; Rights and duties of insurer The insurer voided the policy and denied coverage on the basis that the insured’s installation of a woodstove constituted a material change in risk. The appeal was dismissed. The Court of Appeal found that the insurer’s action demonstrated that it did not consider the installation of the woodstove as a material change in risk. Therefore, the insurer could not rely on Statutory Condition 4 which required the insured to notify the insurer in writing of any change material to the risk within his control and knowledge. |
|||
Practice - Control of litigationControl of litigation; Actions - Subrogation; Policies and insurance contracts - Good faith, breach of This appeal involved a dispute between an insurer and an insured following a large loss caused by a fire and explosion at an apartment building in Toronto. |
|||
|
Would you like us to cover a specific insurance law topic in a future issue of this newsletter? Please feel free to email me with your suggestions.
Thank you, |
||
|