A FSCO arbitrator has confirmed that the first insurer that receives a completed application for accident benefits is required to adjust and pay the claim, even if the insurer is taking an off-coverage position. Overview In Cankaya v. Intact /…
Read more →The Ontario Superior Court has held that an “excluded driver” under an auto policy is not a “listed driver” under the policy for the purpose of receiving accident benefits under the policy. In Dominion v. State Farm, the claimant was…
Read more →The Ontario Superior Court has released its first-ever decision on whether the notorious OPCF 16 (Suspension of Coverage) endorsement form is mandatory when an insured wishes to remove road coverage from their policy. Why would an insured want to remove their road…
Read more →A Superior Court judge has held that an accident victim, who was unlawfully in Canada at the time of the accident, was not a person who “ordinarily resides” in Ontario. In Silva v John Doe, the plaintiff arrived in Canada…
Read more →A Superior Court judge has held (finally) that the $2,000 loss transfer deductible is applied per claimant. Ontario’s loss transfer scheme is found in section 275 of the Insurance Act. Section 275 (1) allows the insurer paying accident benefits to…
Read more →My recent article in the January 2016 K-W OIAA Bulletin As we look forward to a new year of insurance law excitement, let us reflect on some of the interesting cases and legal developments that impacted the auto insurance industry…
Read more →The Ontario Court of Appeal has released a long-awaited decision on whether the equitable doctrine of laches applies to loss transfer matters. The Court held that there is no laches in loss transfer. The doctrine of laches issue arises when…
Read more →A FSCO arbitrator has ruled that a child who fell off a fire truck at a birthday party was not involved in an automobile “accident”. In Carr v. TD, the five-year-old claimant was attending a birthday party for a classmate…
Read more →The Court of Appeal for Ontario has released a decision dealing with whether an owner of an ATV can be held vicariously liable for a driver’s negligence, even though no consent was given to operate the vehicle. The decision is…
Read more →Using the family car to drive for Uber carries the potential for serious consequences in terms of inadequate insurance protection. Until the legal issues surrounding Uber’s business model are resolved, it doesn’t appear likely the industry will come up with a solution.
Read more →When an insurer denies coverage to its insured, and the insured elects not to contest the denial, does this mean that others involved in the action cannot test the denial of coverage? Can a co-defendant (particularly an uninsured carrier in…
Read more →The Ontario Superior Court has released a summary judgment decision in a motor vehicle accident tort action dealing with a limitation period issue. The decision appears to be the first of its kind since the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision…
Read more →