-
Recent Posts
Archives
- October 2015
- July 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- May 2014
- January 2014
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- November 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- September 2011
- May 2011
- February 2011
- October 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- November 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- November 2008
- October 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- April 2004
- March 2004
- December 2003
- November 2003
- May 2003
- April 2003
Categories
- Advertising Injury
- Allocation of Defence Costs
- Appeals
- Auto
- Auto (Tort)
- CGL
- Collateral Benefits
- Commercial Litigation
- Conflict of Laws
- Contract
- Costs
- Damages
- Defamation
- Discoverability
- Discovery
- Duty to Defend
- Environmental
- Evidence
- Exclusions
- Experts and Opinions
- Fire Insurance
- Fires
- FLA
- Insurance News
- Juries
- Lawyers
- Limitation Periods
- Litigation Technology
- Municipalities
- Occupier's Liability
- Pleadings
- Practice and Procedure
- Practice of Law
- Privacy
- Privilege
- Products Liability
- Professional Liability
- Risk Transfer
- Sale of Goods
- Social and Commercial Host Liability
- Subrogation
- Threshold
- Tort News
- Trial Procedure
- Uncategorized
- Uninsured or Underinsured
- Waivers and releases
Meta
Category Archives: Duty to Defend
C.A. Rejects Insurer’s Interpretation of “Anti-concurrent causation” clause
Addendum: On July 31, 2008, the Supreme Court of Canada refused leave to appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeal that was discussed in this post. In Appin Realty Corporation Limited v. Economical Mutual Insurance Company, the Court … Continue reading
Posted in CGL, Duty to Defend, Exclusions, Insurance News
Comments Off on C.A. Rejects Insurer’s Interpretation of “Anti-concurrent causation” clause
Court Orders Home Insurer to Defend Claim Arising Out of ATV Accident
In Economical Insurance Group v. Fleming, Mr. Justice Keith A. Hoilett heard an application brought by Economical Mutual Insurance, for a declaration that it owed no duty to defend its insureds against a claim brought on behalf of a teenaged … Continue reading
Posted in Duty to Defend, Insurance News
Comments Off on Court Orders Home Insurer to Defend Claim Arising Out of ATV Accident
Court Applies Derksen to Order Defence by Both CGL and Auto Policies
In Derksen v. 539938 Ontario Limited, the Supreme Court of Canada ordered both an auto and a CGL insurer to defend a personal injury action. It determined that there had been concurrent causes of the injuries, one covered by the … Continue reading
Posted in Auto, CGL, Duty to Defend, Insurance News
Comments Off on Court Applies Derksen to Order Defence by Both CGL and Auto Policies
C.A. Says No Allocation Between Primary and Excess Insurers
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 … Continue reading
Posted in Allocation of Defence Costs, Insurance News
Comments Off on C.A. Says No Allocation Between Primary and Excess Insurers
Passengers in Car Entitled to Liability Insurance Coverage for Claim by Inline Skater
In Morrow v. Symons, a young man was seriously injured while being towed on inline skates. He sued the driver of the car towing him, as well as three your men who were occupants of the car at the time. … Continue reading
Posted in Auto, Duty to Defend, Insurance News
Comments Off on Passengers in Car Entitled to Liability Insurance Coverage for Claim by Inline Skater
Driver of Go-kart Entitled to Liability Coverage Under Auto Policy
FURTHER UPDATE–We understand that the appeal from this decision was heard by the Court of Appeal on October 31, 2007. We’ll report on the appeal decision as soon as it becomes available. UPDATED–Since the original post, some additional discussion of the … Continue reading
Posted in Auto, Duty to Defend, Insurance News
Comments Off on Driver of Go-kart Entitled to Liability Coverage Under Auto Policy
Negligent Placement of Ladder on Roof of Truck Excluded Under CGL
In Cumis General Insurance Company v. 1319273 Ontario Ltd., Mr. Justice David Brown dealt with an interesting coverage dispute. Cumis had applied for a ruling on whether it owed a duty to defend its insured, the numbered company, in an … Continue reading
Posted in CGL, Duty to Defend, Exclusions, Insurance News
Comments Off on Negligent Placement of Ladder on Roof of Truck Excluded Under CGL
1991 Installation of Fireplace Held to be ‘Accident’ Triggering Coverage for 2003 Fire Claim
[This post contains a correction at the end, dealing with the apportionment of contributions between the two policies. We had previously said that contribution by equal shares had been ordered; in fact, Power J. ordered proportionate contribution by policy … Continue reading
Posted in CGL, Duty to Defend, Insurance News
Comments Off on 1991 Installation of Fireplace Held to be ‘Accident’ Triggering Coverage for 2003 Fire Claim
S.C.C. Weighs In on Claims-Made Policies
The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Jesuit Fathers of Upper Canada v. Guardian Insurance last Thursday. This is an important decision for anyone working or practising in the field of insurance law. In addition to its adjudication … Continue reading
Posted in CGL, Duty to Defend, Exclusions, Insurance News
Comments Off on S.C.C. Weighs In on Claims-Made Policies
“Insured v. Insured” Exclusion Doesn’t Apply to Claim by Insured’s Liquidator
Markham General Insurance Company was ordered wound up in July, 2002. The liquidator of Markham is now suing its former directors and officers, alleging that they negligently managed the company. Those defendants, in turn, had D & O coverage with … Continue reading
Posted in Duty to Defend, Exclusions, Insurance News
Comments Off on “Insured v. Insured” Exclusion Doesn’t Apply to Claim by Insured’s Liquidator