From Insurance

What if … counsel had adduced better evidence? Deguise v. Montminy showed us the ‘What if’

Last July, in Deguise v. Montminy, 2014 QCCS 2672 the Québec Superior Court had occasion to revisit these issues from in Alie v. Bertrand & Frere Construction Co. Ltd., 2002 CanLII 31835, applying the Ontario Court of Appeal decision in that 2002 case to civil law concepts relating to allocation of responsibility among insurers in complex construction and property damage cases.  Many of the rulings in the decision were specific to Québec civil law. In one aspect, however, the case provided an opportunity to test the writer’s hypothesis that the Alie court called on parties and counsel to present expert…

Now for something completely different: Stacking and Unstacking of CGL Insurance Policy Limits

Ready for a real challenge? In this sneak peak at a manuscript on the Stacking and Unstacking of Limits, poses the burning questions of the day: Should the water glasses be filled horizontally, until they are all full?  Or should it be one vertical vessel, which you then use to fill the others equitably? Even if you you’re not into large loss torts or insurance coverage conundrums, join with me in solving this legal puzzle.  (click here for article) P.S. – to navigate to the Richard Wiseman puzzle, click on the pic! Terms of use / Mentions légales

Reading Insurance Law – Of Emperors and Clothes

We lawyers can sometimes adopt a herd mentality.  A senior lawyer or judge says something.  You go back and read the case.  You may be reluctant to voice your difference.  That’s how we, as a profession, can just get things wrong.  The example here comes from insurance law, but you can apply it to your area of expertise.

CGL Policies – the Russian Doll of Business Insurance

Few subjects beguile new lawyers more than the interpretation of commercial general liability insurance policies (CGL). This includes many corporate-commercial lawyers contributing to complex agreements running into hundreds of pages.  Show them a CGL form, and their eyes glaze over. But most CGL policies are only a few pages long, and the longest run a few dozen pages.  Once you “get” the basic structure of the agreement, as described by Justice Rothstein at paragraphs 26-28 of the 2010 Supreme Court of Canada decision in Progressive Homes v. Lombard, you’ll wonder why you ever thought the subject so daunting:

Solving the conundrum of the Canadian tripartite retainer

(le sommaire français suit) Discussion of the 2000 Court of Appeal for Ontario decision, Fellowes McNeil v. Kansa, in my recent article, “No Unbundling of Negligence,” has tapped into a continuing discussion of the precise ethical obligations of lawyers and law firms retained by liability insurers to defend parties in lawsuits, and who “stumble upon” information that may jeopardize the coverage and the insurer’s provision of a defence.  The Supreme Court did grant leave to appeal, but the case was settled before Canada’s top court could hear it.  Eleven years later, you’ll hear it here first, folks: Fellowes was wrongly decided.

Should I get Excess Liability Insurance?

Excess insurance is relatively inexpensive, and well worth the peace of mind.  Lawyers tend to be born insomniacs – you don’t need anything else keeping you up at night! LawPro’s standard (mandatory) policy provides coverage with insurance limits of $1 million per claim and $2 million in the aggregate.  This means there is $1 million in coverage for each claim, but no matter how many claims there are against you, the maximum payable for claims made during any policy year is $2 million.

LawPro 101 – Putting yourself first

If You are Reading this post … (version français) because you need to know what to do, you have taken the first step to getting out from under a potential E&O problem.  Of course a blog is no substitute for legal advice and a proper retainer, and only scratches the surface.  But if this can help you appreciate that there is help out there for you, and that fellow lawyers are pleased to give you advice, then it will have served its purpose.  You can, of course, read the LawPro standard liability insurance policies.  Unless you have experience reading insurance policies,…

LawPro 101 – Sauve qui peut!

Si vous lisez ce post … (English version) parce que vous devez savoir quoi faire, vous avez franchi la première étape pour sortir d’un problème possible. Bien sûr, un blog n’est pas un substitut pour des conseils juridiques. Mais si cela peut vous aider à comprendre que l’aide est là pour vous, et que les confrères sont heureux de vous donner des conseils, alors il aura atteint son but. Vous pouvez, bien sûr, lire les polices d’assurance de LawPro. Sauf si vous avez l’expérience de la lecture des politiques d’assurance, vous êtes probablement comme la majorité des avocats que je connais, qui n’en ont…

1% Liability: Fact or Fiction of Apportionment in Tort Law?

Click on the link to read my article, “1% Liability: Fact or Fiction of Apportionment in Tort Law?” The Advocates Quarterly, Vol 30, 2005 30AdvocQ104.  It was updated and redacted in 2007 here: civmayweb08. Putting the 1% principle to the empirical test – will it survive scrutiny?  Will you ask for your tuition back from your torts prof? Terms of use / Mentions légales