Knowledge Centre

articles

The Need for the Whole Story May Make Summary Judgment the Wrong Direction

FIRM:Kelly Santini LLP
JURISDICTION:Ontario
DATE:May 2015
AUTHOR: Mitch Kitagawa and Madelaine Thurston
CATEGORIES:Articles, Knowledge Centre

In Yusuf v Cooley, 2014 ONSC 6501, the plaintiff, who was 11 years old at the time of the accident, brought a personal injury action against multiple parties. The plaintiff was struck by a westbound driver as she crossed the … Read more »

Read more »

Court of Appeal Rules Limitation Period Commences with Denial of Claim

FIRM:Kelly Santini LLP
JURISDICTION:Ontario
DATE:May 2015
AUTHOR: Mitch Kitagawa and Madelaine Thurston
CATEGORIES:Articles, Knowledge Centre

In Sagan v Dominion of Canada General Insurance Co., 2014 ONCA 720, the appellant (plaintiff) was involved in a motor vehicle accident on March 1, 2008. He advised the respondent (defendant) of his claim, and the respondent provided the appellant … Read more »

Read more »

Do You Have to Disclose the Terms of a Mary Carter Agreement to Non-settling Defendants?

FIRM:Kelly Santini LLP
JURISDICTION:Ontario
DATE:May 2015
AUTHOR: Mitch Kitagawa and Christina Lachance
CATEGORIES:Articles, Knowledge Centre

In Stamatopoulos et al v Harris et al 2014 ONSC 6313, the Divisional Court had to decide whether the terms of a Mary Carter Agreement (“MCA”) must be disclosed to non-settling defendants or whether it is sufficient to simply disclose … Read more »

Read more »

Driving while under the influence does not necessarily exclude coverage

FIRM:Cox & Palmer
JURISDICTION:New Brunswick
DATE:May 2015
AUTHOR: No Author
CATEGORIES:Articles, Automobile, Knowledge Centre

Conrad v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Company, 2015 NBQB 14 Conrad and her friend, Rideout, were out at a pub. Rideout said she was able to drive Conrad’s car. While operating the vehicle, Rideout rear-ended another car. Rideout’s breathalyzer samples showed … Read more »

Read more »

Bifurcation orders and the threshold for severance

FIRM:Cox & Palmer
JURISDICTION:New Brunswick
DATE:May 2015
AUTHOR: No Author
CATEGORIES:Articles, Automobile, Knowledge Centre

Shanks v. Shay, 2015 NBCA 2 Shanks, who was involved in two car accidents, was denied Section B benefits. TD Home was his insurer at the time of the first accident. It took the position that Shanks failed to disclose … Read more »

Read more »

Lizotte vs. Aviva, compagnie d’assurances du Canada, 2015 QCCA 152

FIRM:Stein Monast S.E.N.C.L.R.
JURISDICTION:Quebec
DATE:May 2015
CATEGORIES:Articles, Knowledge Centre

In the framework of a complaint by an insured who was dissatisfied with the processing of her claim, the Syndic of the damage insurance oversight body, the Chambre de l’assurance dommages, conducted an inquiry into Aviva. In accordance with section … Read more »

Read more »

The “Additional Insured” – Defence or No Defence?

FIRM:Lindsay LLP
JURISDICTION:British Columbia
DATE:April 2015
AUTHOR: Carmen Place
CATEGORIES:Articles, Coverage, Knowledge Centre

Recent developments in the law as to when to defend or not defend an “additional insured” has identified two potential avenues the court may take in determining this issue.  In some cases the court may find that a particular claim … Read more »

Read more »

Obligations of Insurers of Alberta Residents for Injuries in Saskatchewan

FIRM:McKercher LLP
JURISDICTION:Saskatchewan
DATE:April 2015
AUTHOR: Dean Stanley
CATEGORIES:Articles, Automobile, Knowledge Centre

With recent years of strong economic growth resulting in more inter-provincial traffic, Saskatchewan has seen an increase in motor vehicle accidents involving residents of Alberta. Insurers of Alberta residents are obligated to provide personal injury benefits according to Saskatchewan law … Read more »

Read more »

Who is an Expert For the Purposes of Rule 53.03: The Court of Appeal’s Decision in Westerhof v Gee Estate

FIRM:Blaney McMurtry LLP
JURISDICTION:Ontario
DATE:April 2015
AUTHOR: Giovanna Asaro
CATEGORIES:Articles, Knowledge Centre

When can a witness who has not been retained by a party to the litigation give opinion testimony at trial? Must that witness comply with the requirements of Rule 53.03 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, which is directed at … Read more »

Read more »

Common Law Privacy Tort Strikes Again

FIRM:Kelly Santini LLP
JURISDICTION:Ontario
DATE:April 2015
AUTHOR: Mitch Kitagawa and Madelaine Thurston
CATEGORIES:Articles, Knowledge Centre, Privacy

The decision of Hopkins v Kay, 2015 ONCA 112, is regarding privacy law in the hospital setting. The main issue was whether the new common law tort of intrusion of seclusion applied even though the hospital is governed by the … Read more »

Read more »