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.
In a coverage dispute between insurer and insured, the Supreme Court of Canada has been clear that even a mere possibility of a claim coming within coverage territory is enough to trigger the duty to defend. This is called the ‘pleadings rule’ and it is well known to plaintiff and defence counsel alike. What happens [...]
In the recent decision Jevco Insurance Co. v. Malaviya, 2013 ONSC 675, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice held that in the context of Ontario’s Standard Automobile Policy (OAP 1), a primary insurer has an ongoing duty to defend its insured, even where the insurer has offered to pay the policy limits.