4 total
Motion to convert application to action granted due to complex issues and disputed material facts.
The applicants commenced an application seeking declarations for insurance coverage and damages following a fire that destroyed their home.
The respondent insurer, who had denied the claim and voided the policy for alleged misrepresentation, brought a motion to convert the application into an action.
The court granted the motion, finding that the proceeding involved multiple issues requiring a trial, including material facts in dispute, credibility issues, and a negligence claim against the insurance broker that could not be bifurcated without consent.
Summary judgment set aside due to unresolved factual disputes and errors in commercial lease interpretation.
The appellant tenant sued the respondent commercial landlord for damages arising from roof leaks and a non-functioning gas line.
The landlord obtained summary judgment dismissing the action.
On appeal, the Court of Appeal found that the motion judge erred by failing to resolve material factual disputes regarding when the tenant's obligation to insure commenced and whether the premises were insurable.
The motion judge also committed extricable errors of law in interpreting the 'as is' provisions of the lease by conflating 'Premises' and 'Building' and ignoring a relevant schedule.
The appeal was allowed and the summary judgment set aside.
A commercial tenant's action for property damage and business interruption was dismissed on summary judgment due to the lease's 'as is' clause and covenant to insure.
The defendant landlord moved for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiff tenant's action for damages resulting from roof leaks and a non-operational gas line.
The court examined the commercial lease, which included "as is" clauses, a covenant for the tenant to obtain all-risk and business interruption insurance, and a waiver of liability.
The court found that the lease terms effectively allocated the risk of such losses to the tenant, regardless of the landlord's repair efforts or the tenant's failure to obtain the required insurance.
The distinction between business delay and business interruption was deemed immaterial.
The motion for summary judgment was granted, and the action was dismissed.
Breach of settlement application dismissed; confidentiality clause applied only to the applicant.
The applicant filed an application alleging that the respondents contravened a previous settlement by disclosing the Minutes of Settlement to their insurer.
The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the insurer had defended the respondents in the original application and was already aware of the settlement terms.
Additionally, the Tribunal noted that the confidentiality provision in the Minutes of Settlement explicitly applied only to the applicant, meaning the respondents were not bound by any confidentiality requirement regarding the settlement.
