The appellant, a primary insurer, sought a declaration that the respondent, an excess insurer, had a duty to contribute to defence costs incurred on behalf of their common insured.
The primary policy contained a duty to defend, while the excess policy did not and stipulated that defence costs eroded its policy limit.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the doctrine of equitable contribution did not apply because the primary and excess policies did not cover the same risk.
The primary insurer was held to its bargain with the insured, and the excess insurer was not required to contribute to defence costs.
