Stephen MacDougall

The plaintiff sued her home insurer after it denied her claim for a fire loss.

The insurer denied the claim on the basis that the plaintiff committed fraud in her claim for Additional Living Expenses (ALE) by submitting a fake lease and using the rent money for other purposes.

The court found that the plaintiff and her purported landlord engaged in a deliberate scheme to obtain money from the insurer under the guise of rent.

Because the plaintiff made a willfully false statement in her proof of loss regarding the ALE, her entire claim was vitiated.

The plaintiff's action was dismissed, and the insurer's counterclaim for repayment of amounts already paid out was granted.

The applicant appealed the Committee of Adjustment's refusal of a consent to sever and minor variances to create a new residential building lot in Orangeville.

The Tribunal found that the proposed severance and variances met the criteria under s. 51(24) and the four tests under s. 45(1) of the Planning Act, being consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conforming to the Growth Plan and local official plans.

The appeal was allowed, provisional consent was granted subject to conditions, and the variances were authorized.

Forest Grove Homes Limited appealed a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision ordering Tarion Warranty Corporation to repair three Ontario Building Code violations related to the roof of a new home owned by Elaine Ducas.

Ducas cross-appealed, seeking an order requiring Tarion to investigate and correct the underlying cause of water penetration, which the Tribunal found was likely ice damming.

The Divisional Court dismissed both the appeal and the cross-appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error in the Tribunal's factual findings regarding the building code violations, and agreeing that the statutory warranty did not require the builder to investigate the cause of the leak absent proof that a design flaw caused the ice damming.

The appellant appealed a decision by Tarion Warranty Corporation denying her claim for warranty coverage under the Ontario New Home Warranties Plan Act for water penetration into her home.

The tribunal found that the water penetration was primarily caused by ice damming.

While ice damming itself is a naturally occurring phenomenon and not explicitly warranted, the tribunal held that the appellant was entitled to a home built in compliance with the Ontario Building Code and the warranty of workmanship.

The tribunal accepted expert evidence that the home's attic insulation, eaves protection, and starter strips violated the Ontario Building Code.

Tarion was ordered to repair these specific defects, though the appellant was denied a broader order requiring Tarion to identify and correct the entire water penetration problem due to her failure to comply with a prior order to conduct an engineering inspection.