The applicant, Ontario, sought a declaration that its insurer, St. Paul, owed a duty to defend it in an underlying class action regarding bail system delays.
Ontario argued St. Paul was estopped from denying coverage due to its delay in communicating its position.
The court found no estoppel, as Ontario controlled its own defence and suffered no prejudice.
On the coverage issue, the court held the true nature of the underlying claims involved harms that were expected from Ontario's policy choices, which fell outside the policy's definition of an 'occurrence' or 'accident'.
The application was dismissed.