The applicant university sought a declaration requiring insurers of a contractor to provide a defence in an underlying personal injury action arising from a trip and fall at a Canada Day event involving inflatable rides.
The university had been named as an additional insured under the contractor’s commercial general liability policy, but only for liability arising from the contractor’s operations.
Applying the Supreme Court of Canada duty-to-defend principles, the court examined the pleadings to determine the true nature of the claim.
The statement of claim alleged that the plaintiff tripped on a metal stake near an inflatable but did not specifically connect the hazard to the contractor’s operations.
Because the pleadings did not establish a sufficient nexus between the alleged negligence and the contractor’s activities covered by the policy, the insurers had no duty to defend the university.
