MT Insurance Law Blog

Double exposure image with a businessman holding an umbrella laid over a cityscape background

Miller Thomson Blogs put a more conversational lens on Canadian law. See the diverse perspectives of our lawyers here.

Displaying 1-10 of 304

A foul ball to the head: No negligence established under the Occupier’s Liability Act

June 2, 2022 | Fareeha Qaiser, Caitlin VanDuzer

Introduction The British Columbia Court of Appeal, in Rivers v North Vancouver (District), 2021 BCCA 407, considered a negligence claim brought pursuant to the common law and British Columbia’s Occupiers Liability Act (the “Act”). In doing so, they clarified what...

More

British Columbia Court of Appeal comments on the test for want for prosecution applications

March 30, 2022 | Fareeha Qaiser, Caitlin VanDuzer

Introduction The Court of Appeal for British Columbia (the “Court of Appeal”), in Drennan v Smith, 2022 BCCA 86,  provided significant commentary on want for prosecution applications and warned of possible changes to come. Mr. Tyler Drennan (the “Appellant”) appealed...

More

The Supreme Court of Canada addresses promissory estoppel in the insurance context

November 29, 2021 | Karen L. Weslowski, Caitlin VanDuzer

Introduction In the recent decision of Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia v Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Company of Canada, the Supreme Court of Canada considered the application of the doctrine of promissory estoppel in the context of a...

More

Case Commentary: Nelson (City) v. Marchi, 2021 SCC 41 – The Supreme Court of Canada clarifies the distinction between core and non-core policy decisions

October 26, 2021 | Karen L. Weslowski, Caitlin VanDuzer

Introduction In the recent decision of Nelson (City) v. Marchi, the Supreme Court of Canada clarified the law with respect to what constitutes a “core policy decision” rendering a government or public authority immune from liability.  In this particular case,...

More

Henderson v. Northbridge General Insurance Corporation, 2021 BCSC 1841: The duty to defend claims alleging intentional acts

October 14, 2021 | Karen L. Weslowski, Andrew Hefford

Introduction Recently, in the context of an alleged “shaken baby” claim, the Supreme Court of British Columbia considered whether an insurer had a duty to defend a claim against its insured arising from allegations framed in both negligence and assault. ...

More

British Columbia Court of Appeal clarifies indivisibility analysis

September 23, 2021 | Fareeha Qaiser, Caitlin VanDuzer

Introduction The Court of Appeal for British Columbia (the “Court of Appeal”), in Neufeldt v. Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, 2021 BCCA 327, recently provided significant commentary on the important yet difficult issue of indivisible injuries. Insurance Corporation of British...

More

Court of Québec orders insurance policy disclosure in dispute

August 19, 2021 | Nicolas Sacha Nesviginsky

Twenty-five years ago, Louis Champagne radiomutuel inc.[1] established the right to obtain a copy of the opposing party’s insurance policy in order to involve its insurer in the claim. This right was confirmed in a recent Court of Québec judgment.[2]...

More

Changes in “occupants” found not to be a material change in risk for the purpose of voiding a home insurance policy

May 25, 2021 | Fareeha Qaiser, Matthew E. Wray

The British Columbia Supreme Court in Dubroy v. Canadian Northern Shield Insurance Co., 2021 BCSC 352 held that a home insurance policy was not rendered void because there was no material change in risk arising from a change in occupants....

More

Accountability for the section 7(4) accounting report: When is it ‘reasonable and necessary’?

May 18, 2021 | Helen D.K. Friedman, Emily Compton

The requirement under section 7(4) of the Ontario Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule [1] for insurers to fund accounting reports on behalf of insured persons is a reasonable one. To be eligible for funding by the insurer, the reports must be:...

More

British Columbia Court of Appeal confirms a strict two-year limitation period to commence third-party claims

February 24, 2021 | Fareeha Qaiser, Derek Odgers

Introduction The Court of Appeal in Sohal v. Lezama, 2021 BCCA 40 (“Sohal”) recently held that a court does not have the discretion to permit a third-party notice for contribution and indemnity (“contribution”) if the limitation period has expired under...

More

Displaying 1-10 of 304

Disclaimer

This blog sets out a variety of materials relating to the law to be used for educational and non-commercial purposes only; the author(s) of this blog do not intend the blog to be a source of legal advice. Please retain and seek the advice of a lawyer and use your own good judgement before choosing to act on any information included in the blog. If you choose to rely on the materials, you do so entirely at your own risk.