Gowling WLG (Canada)

In a property insurance appeal, insured homeowners sought full guaranteed rebuilding costs after a total-loss flood, including legal-compliance costs imposed by conservation authority requirements.

The Court interpreted the standard form policy and guaranteed rebuilding cost endorsement together, holding the compliance-cost exclusion remained operative except for the specified additional $10,000 coverage.

The majority held the exclusion’s language was unambiguous and that applying it did not nullify the endorsement’s core benefit of coverage beyond the policy limit.

Dissenting reasons would have allowed broader recovery at least for compliance costs tied to laws in force at renewal.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.

On a statutory appeal from a municipal assessment tribunal, the court addressed the standard of review and the tribunal's authority to increase an assessment at a municipality's request after a taxpayer complaint.

The majority held that reasonableness applied because the issue concerned interpretation of the tribunal's home statute and no correctness category displaced deference.

Interpreting the statute purposively, the majority concluded the tribunal could change an assessment upward in this procedural context and reinstated its decision.

The dissent would have applied correctness, found the tribunal exceeded the complaint's scope, and would have remitted for a new hearing.

The appeal was allowed with costs, with a four-judge dissent.