The appellant appealed from a summary judgment dismissing its claim for insurance coverage under a Builder's Risk Policy.
The motion judge found the roof collapse was caused by frost heaving, an excluded peril under the policy.
The Court of Appeal upheld the decision, finding summary judgment was appropriate where the respondent's expert evidence was uncontested, the frost or freezing exclusion applied, and the doctrine of nullification did not render the exclusion unenforceable because the policy still covered other perils.
