Articles

Insurers should be aware of the recent costs decision in Przyk v. Hamilton Retirement Group Ltd. This case sets an adverse precedent to insurers that employ strict policies against paying out modest claims, categorized as defensible, prior to trial. Even if the insurer succeeds at trial on the merits, the court may award no costs to that insurer.

This article gives an overview of the CPD program conducted by the Insurance Law Section in 2018 which was well received and is returning on November 22, 2019. This program contains a total of 3 hours of Professionalism content and it qualifies for LAWPRO Risk Management Credit.

In the recent decision of CP Food & Beverage, Inc. v. United States Fire Insurance Company, the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada held that coverage was not available under a crime policy where the insured’s employees had defrauded the insured’s customers through misuse of customer credit cards. 

I would like to congratulate our very own Roger Horst and Rafal Szymanski on successfully representing the respondent in Correct Building Corporation v. Lehman. The Court dismissed the appeal against our client and granted our client’s cross-appeal, resulting in a dismissal of all claims against our client by way of summary judgment.

Topics covered this week included franchise law and rescission, liability for wrongful patent enforcement, the duty to defend in the MVA context, family law (custody and access and breach of court orders), securities class actions, and mortgage enforcement. John Polyzogopoulos

On January 14, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada denied Precision Plating Ltd.’s (“Precision Plating”) application for leave to appeal the British Columbia Court of Appeal’s (“BCCA”) decision in Precision Plating Ltd. v. Axa Pacific Insurance Co., (“Precision Plating v Axa”).