Following a fatal motor vehicle accident caused by an uninsured driver, a dispute arose between two insurers over the priority of their respective policies in funding the settlement.
The motions judge held that the driver's State Farm Fire umbrella policy, which included an uninsured motorist option, had to respond before the passenger's Royal Insurance O.E.F. 44 family protection endorsement.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the umbrella policy was not a motor vehicle liability policy under the Insurance Act and was explicitly excess insurance.
Therefore, the passenger's O.E.F. 44 endorsement had to be exhausted before recourse could be made to the umbrella policy.
