The appellant insurer appealed a decision holding it liable under an insurance policy for goods stolen from a truck driven by a temporary employee of the respondent cartage company.
The insurer argued that the trial judge erred in placing the onus on the insurer to prove the applicability of an exclusion clause for employee infidelity, in finding that infidelity requires more than simple negligence, and in his application of the standard of proof.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, affirming that the onus is on the insurer to prove an exclusion clause applies, that infidelity imports a moral element, and that requiring a degree of proof commensurate with the gravity of the allegation does not depart from the balance of probabilities standard in civil cases.
