Part A: Cases Flashcards
Glynn v. Scottish Union & National Insurance Co. LTD
Describe the issues of the case:
Joel Glynn and his wife were injured in a car accident as a result of negligence by Sutherland, the driver of the other car. Glynn got a settlement from Sutherland. Glynn then managed to get his insurer to pay for the medical expenses.
The insurer (Scottish Union) appealed this because Glynn double recovered.
The insurer believes that the contract was one of indemnity and that the insured should not benefit from the accident.
Define Indemnity Contract:
where amount receivable is measured by extent of pecuniary loss.
Is Life Insurance and Indemnity contract?
No, since any amount of money does not replace a person dying
Glynn v. Scottish Union & National Insurance Co. LTD
What was the verdict of the case? What are the implications?
Identified as an indemnity contract and subrogation allowed. The insurer wins the case.
The paper states that each contract needs to evaluated on a case by case basis to determine whether it is a contract of indemnity. If so, no double recovery allowed.
Regal Films Corporation LTD v. Glens Falls Insurance Co.
Describe the issues of the case:
The insurer issued a policy protecting against fire, lightning, wind, tornado, theft, hail, etc.
The policy was titled ‘inland marine policy’
Plaintiff made a fire claim, providing proof of loss after 60 days, but as soon as practicable.
Part IV of the Insurance Act (applicable to fire loss) states proof must be provided whenever practicable, however inland marine policies require proof to be filed within 60 days.
Regal Films Corporation LTD v. Glens Falls Insurance Co.
Describe the outcome of the case:
The policy does come under Part IV provisions, and the plaintiff is entitled to receive all payments for their loss and costs.
Fletcher v. Manitoba Public Insurance Corp.
Describe the issues of the case:
Both people involved suffered severe injuries in a car accident. However, the person responsible had inadequate insurance and could only cover 500,000/1.4million in damages
Fletcher purchased his insurance thinking he had the maximum amount of coverage, when in fact he did not have ‘underinsured motors coverage’
Fletcher v. Manitoba Public Insurance Corp.
Describe the verdict of the case:
Plaintiff awarded the damages as the defendant (MPI) was found negligent
Fletcher v. Manitoba Public Insurance Corp.
Why was the appeal dismissed?
- Reliance: duty of care for the agent to explain all available coverages
- Reasonableness of Reliance: plaintiff relied on the info provided by the agent
- Knowledge of reliance: MPI should have known that the victim would rely on their info
Fletcher v. Manitoba Public Insurance Corp.
Describe why government insurance agents have more/less duty to advise than private company.
Less Duty
Employees not specialists in risk advice (salespeople)
Employees don’t have to be licensed as agents
Private company agents provide info AND advice, public just provides info
Broadhurst & Ball v. American Home Assurance Co.
Describe the issues of the case:
The respondents (B&B) had a primary liability policy with American Home for $500,000 and an excess liability policy with Guardian for 9.5Million. They were sued for 20Million.
3 issues:
1. Coverage issue
2. Obligation to defend issue
3. Allocation of defence costs issue
Guardian denied duty to defend because they accused B&B of knowing about the lawsuit when they signed up for excess coverage
Broadhurst & Ball v. American Home Assurance Co.
Describe the outcome of the case:
Guardian couldn’t come up with any evidence to prove the respondents had known of the claims beforehand, therefore Guardian responsible for their excess coverage.
Allocation of defence costs issue: American Home and Guardian equally share defense costs since it is both their duty to defend. (it is normal for primary insurer to cover defines costs until the policy limit is exhausted, and then the excess insurer takes over)
Dillon v. Guardian Insurance Co.
Describe the issues of the case:
Dillon hit a 5 year old with his car and was sued for 100,000. He had a policy limit of 50,000 with Guardian.
A settlement offer was made just before trial at 45 thousand, however council decided not to settle for anything more than 40,000.
Trial resulted in Dillon owing 80,000. Should Dillon be responsible in paying the 30,000 out of his own pocket that is in excess of his coverage?
Describe the case of Economical vs. BC’s Privacy commissioner
In 2011 delegate ruled that economical had not adequately informed one policyholder that their credit information could be collected for the purpose of underwriting or assessing future risk of loss
The customer has signed a release in 2003 allowing the collection of credit information however this was so long ago credit information implied different thing
Economical ordered to provide all current policyholders with adequate notice and review the consents it had obtained since the privacy law came into effect in 2004
This was overturned
Describe issues and outcome of Whiten vs. Pilot case
House fire, insured denied coverage on grounds that family had set fire. This allegation was discredited at trial
Issue of punitive damages for insurer not acting in good faith. Awarded 1 million punitive
