skip to main content
Back to Top

Newsletters, Papers and Publications

select
select
select
select
Dec
2017
Noteworthy

Ontario Superior Court Finds Duty to Defend for Privacy Tort of Intrusion upon Seclusion

Nov
2017
Noteworthy

Will one word impact the scope of Additional Insured Coverage?

Oct
2017
Noteworthy

Ontario Superior Court Finds Property Coverage Lost By Late Notice

Feb
2017
Noteworthy

Ontario Court of Appeal Finds No Entitlement to Replacement Cost under Fire Policy

In Carter v Intact Insurance Co., 2016 ONCA 917, the insureds sought indemnity for replacement cost and building code upgrades after fire damaged several buildings. At first instance, the Motion Judge found that the policy did not entitle the insu......

Dec
2016
Noteworthy

Ontario Court of Appeal Affirms the Duty to Defend Alleged Consequential Damage

Recently, in Parkhill Excavation Ltd. v. Royal & Sunalliance Insurance Co. of Canada, 2016 ONCA 832, the Court of Appeal for Ontario reversed the motion judge’s finding there was no duty to defend a construction deficiency claim in respect of the installation of septic systems. At first instance, Healey J. had found there was no de-fence obligation as the subcontractor exception to the “Your Work” exclusion did not apply because the subcontractor was a supplier and not a contractor. The Court of Appeal held that because consequential damages were alleged, the Your Work exclusion could not apply, a de-fence was owed, and it was unnecessary to go on to con-sider the Subcontractor Exception to the exclusion.

Nov
2016
Noteworthy

Dirty Windows Help to Clarify Appellate Review of Standard Form Contracts

Just when you thought the judicial approach to the appellate standard of review for Canadian contract interpretation had been addressed, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) rendered its decision in Ledcor Construction Ltd. v. Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Co., 2016 SCC 37 (“Ledcor”) on September 15, 2016. Ledcor has created an exception to the Court’s significant decision in Sattva Capital Corp. v. Creston Moly Corp., 2014 SCC 53 (“Sattva”), which had held that the appropriate appellate standard of review for con-tract interpretation was the deferential one of palpable and overriding error.

Sep
2016
Noteworthy

The Scope of an Insurer's Duty to Defend an Additional Insured

Two recent Ontario Court of Appeal decisions have, to a considerable extent, clarified the obligations of an insurer that has agreed to provide liability coverage to persons or entities as additional insureds.

May
2016
Noteworthy

The Ontario Court of Appeal addresses the limitation period for claiming defence costs

In Daverne v. John Switzer Fuels Ltd., 2015 ONCA 919, the Ontario Court of Appeal dealt with the issue of what limitation period applies with-in the context of an insurer’s duty to defend. The successful appeal found that the insured’s claim was barred by the limitation found in the subject liability policy of one year. In rendering their decision, the three-person panel considered an issue that has not been comprehensively addressed in Ontario.

Feb
2016
Noteworthy

Monk v. Farmers' Mutual Insurance Co. (Lindsay): Further Lessons in Policy Language and Interpretation

In Monk v. Farmers' Mutual Insurance Co. (Lindsay), [2015] ONCA 911, the Court of Appeal reversed the motion judge's decision that the "faulty workmanship" exclu-sion applied to both direct and indirect damages. The Court ruled that the motion judge's interpretation of the exclusion was overly broad and that the damage to the insured's prop-erty was covered by the policy whether or not the damage constituted resulting damage from faulty workmanship.

Aug
2015
Noteworthy

The Expanding Scope of the Absolute Pollution Exclusion

The "absolute pollution exclusion" is a standard exclusion clause commonly found in Commercial General Liability ("CGL") policies. It purports to preclude coverage for losses arising out of the discharge or escape of pollutants at or from an insured's premises. The term "pollutant" is commonly defined in CGL policies as including "any solid, liquid, gaseous or thermal irritant or contami-nant, including smoke, vapour, soot, fumes, acids, alkalis, chemicals and waste. Waste includes materials to be recycled, reconditioned or reclaimed".

Items 1 to 10 of 52
  • Canadian Lawyer - Top 10 Boutique 2017-18
  • The ARC Group
  • Best Lawyers 2017
  • Canadian Legal Lexpert Directory 2016

© 201​6-17 All rights reserved | Legal Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Accessibility