The appellant jewellery store was robbed, but its video surveillance system failed to record the event due to an employee's error in operating the VCR.
The respondent insurer denied coverage, relying on a warranties endorsement requiring the system to be operational at all times insofar as it was within the Named Insured's control.
The trial judge dismissed the action, finding the employer responsible for the employee's failure.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that the endorsement distinguished between the 'Named Insured' and its employees, and that the insured had satisfied its obligation by instituting a reasonably fail-safe procedure.
