Supreme Court


Agent breach obligation by not informing plaintiff of vacancy clause

Plaintiffs arranged insurance coverage through defendant for building. Building was damaged by vandalism while building was vacant. Defendant denied coverage on basis of vacancy clause in policy. Trial judge found plaintiff was not aware of vacancy provision. Trial judge found plaintiff relied on defendant to ensure coverage and appellant failed to advise about vacant exclusion. Plaintiffs were awarded damages of $16,737 for failure of defendant to provide insurance coverage for loss to dwelling that sustained damages while building was unoccupied. Defendant’s appeal was dismissed. Trial judge did not make palpable and overriding error in coming to factual conclusions. Trial judge correctly held that agent breached obligation by not telling plaintiff there would be no coverage when building was vacant.

Newbigging v. M. Butler Insurance Brokers Ltd. (Sep. 13, 2012, Ont. S.C.J., Maddalena J., File No. 53369/11) 220 A.C.W.S. (3d) 248.

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Law Times reports that there is the highest number of lawyer candidates in the upcoming Law Society of Ontario Bencher election since 1995, but turn-out is declining. Do you think voting should be mandatory for all lawyers and paralegals in this election?