Canada Year-End Review: The Top Insurance Cases Of 2018

In 2018, these were the top ten Canadian court rulings that we believe will have an impact on the landscape of insurance litigation in the years ahead.

Index:

3091-5177 Québec inc. (Éconolodge Aéroport) v. Lombard General Insurance Co. Of Canada Société des traversiers du Québec c. Construction CGP inc. Compagnie d'assurances Missisquoi c. Constructions Reliance inc.e Tardif c. Succession de Dubé Condominium Corp. No. 9312374 v. Aviva Insurance Co. of Canada Clubine v. Paniagua Hanson v. Totten Insurance Group Inc. Trade Finance Solutions Inc. v. Equinox Global Limited Scale Estate v. The Cooperators General Insurance Company Canadian Elevator Industry Welfare Trust Fund v. Skinner 1. 3091-5177 Québec inc. (Éconolodge Aéroport) v. Lombard General Insurance Co. Of Canada

When cars are stolen from a hotel parking lot, the hotel's insurer must pay. That was the ruling handed down by the Supreme Court of Canada in 3091-5177 Québec inc. (Éconolodge Aéroport) v. Lombard General Insurance Co. Of Canada. The case involved a park and fly hotel, where guests would leave their car while travelling and using a shuttle service to get to the airport. Guests had to hand over their keys at the front desk so that their car could be moved for snow removal, but the hotel's liability insurance policy contained a care, custody or control exclusion clause. The Court found that the clause was unambiguous, but that the question surrounding whether the hotel operator had been transferred custody of the vehicles was "a question of mixed fact and law." The decision by the trial judge - who found both that the hotel operator failed to secure its parking lot and that the cars were not in its care, custody or control - is not open to review by an appellate court, unless there has been a palpable and overriding error. Our understanding is that this standard of review would not be applicable when the terms of a standard policy require interpretation.

----------

2. Société des traversiers du Québec c. Construction CGP inc.

   In another Quebec case, an insured contractor, who was being sued for damages in connection with work it had done, brought a Wellington motion to force its insurers to take up its defence. The main point of contention in Société des traversiers du Québec c. Construction CGP inc. stemmed from the fact that the insurers modified their coverage opinion as the file progressed. Before proceedings were brought, the insurers had reserved all rights to raise any other provision of the insurance policy. Once the proceedings had been filed and amended, the circumstances on which the insurers based their opinion were clarified. This led them to modify...