The appellant insurer appealed a Divisional Court decision which found that the insurer's notice cancelling the insured's weekly income benefits was inadequate to trigger the two-year limitation period.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the Director's Delegate had applied the correct 'clear and unequivocal' test for the notice.
Furthermore, the Court held that the Divisional Court erred in requiring the reasons for cancellation to be legally correct under section 24(8) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Scheme; the reasons merely need to be provided to allow the insured to decide whether to challenge the cancellation.
