What keeps insurers up at night
Pizza delivery risk on Superbowl Sunday: http://goo.gl/WFgQj The things that keep insurers up at night.
Ontario court finds property transfers by convicted auto insurance fraudster represent an effort to put assets out of reach
Very interesting take on the implications of insurance fraud: http://goo.gl/19Pqe
Alberta Court of Appeal upholds cap on general damages
The Alberta Court of Appeal has upheld Alberta’s Minor Injury Regulations, capping general damages in motor vehicle accident litigation at $4,000. The Court released its decision in Morrow v. Zhang, the litigation challenging Alberta’s Minor Injury Regulations, on June 12, 2009.
In the meantime, the ruling by the Nova Scotia Supreme Court in Hartling et al v. Nova Scotia is expected to be heard in the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal in October 2009.
An interesting take on Alberta’s decision can be found here.
Backcountry ski rescue volunteers face liability
This is a potentially troubling development for volunteer rescue operations, particularly where they operate in backcountry ski operations.
Actions against a bankrupt’s insurer can proceed notwithstanding denial of coverage
Hemeon v. District of West Hants, 2008 NSSC 234 examines the interplay between section 69.4 of Canada’s Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3 (the “BIA”), and section 28 of Nova Scotia’s Insurance Act, R.S.N.S. 1989, c. 231.
The BIA provides for an automatic stay of proceedings in all litigation against a person who makes an assignment in bankruptcy, but then permits that stay to be lifted if the applicant can demonstrate that it will be “materially prejudiced” by the stay, or that lifting the is “equitable on other grounds”.
The Insurance Act provides that if a person obtains judgment against another for which there is insurance, and execution against the judgment debtor is returned unsatisfied, then the judgment creditor can bring the same action against the insurer, and the insurer will be liable up to the face value of the policy.
Although the case is based on Nova Scotia legislation, most provincial insurance legislation contains provisions similar to those interpreted in this case.