Two recent cases have critically assessed whether or not adverse cost insurance policies should be disclosed to the defence: Abu-Hamid v. Napar¹ and Fleming v. Brown.² In Abu-Hamid, Master Short concluded that the adverse costs insurance policy should not be disclosed to the defence.
The existence of adverse costs insurance will be a factor to consider on a security for costs motion, but it will not, on its own, decide the motion. Two recent decisions have addressed this issue: Alary v Brown 2015 ONSC 3021 (“Brown”), and Shah v Loblaw Companies Ltd. 2015 ONSC 5987 (“Shah”).
To succeed in an occupier’s liability claim, a plaintiff must be able to point to some act or failure to act on the part of the occupier that caused the plaintiff’s injury. An occupier need not remove every possible danger – the standard of care is one of reasonableness and not perfection.
Where an automobile is leased or rented and involved in a motor vehicle accident, section 277(1.1) of the Insurance Act, sets out the order in which insurance policies are to respond. The section states that “the third party liability provisions of any available motor vehicle liability policies shall respond” in the following order: insurance available [...]
The recent Ontario Superior Court decision of Azzopardi v. John Doe and The Personal Insurance Company [“Azzopardi”] appears to to lower the threshold for the types of corroborative evidence that Ontario courts will accept when considering a party’s entitlement to under-insured coverage in accidents involving unidentified vehicles. Under-insured motorist coverage where an unidentified motorist is [...]
In the recent decision D’Ettorre v. Coachman Insurance Co., 2012 ONSC 3613, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice on judicial review concluded that an assignment of a plaintiff’s Statutory Accident Benefits as part of a settlement of a tort claim was impermissible at law.
A motor vehicle accident was alleged to have occurred on October 29, 2007, involving the plaintiff, Hamid Dervisholli (“Hamid”) and the defendant, Roman Cervenak (“Cervenak”). State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company insured both vehicles involved in the alleged collision. Hamid made a claim for accident benefits from State Farm and also commenced a tort action [...]
A man walked into a car rental office and rented a car. He was on a business trip. While driving the rented car, the man is involved in a collision with the plaintiff. The man’s insurer said that since the man was on business the real renter of the car was the man’s employer, and [...]