2 total
Plaintiff awarded modest partial indemnity costs despite recovering within Small Claims jurisdiction.
Following a jury trial arising from a pedestrian–motor vehicle collision and related assault, the plaintiff recovered modest damages totalling $3,720 plus prejudgment interest.
The court considered prejudgment interest under s. 128(3) of the Courts of Justice Act and awarded the amount claimed.
The primary issue concerned costs where the recovery fell within the monetary jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court.
Applying Rules 57.01 and 57.05 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, the court declined to deny costs entirely but held that the modest recovery and settlement offers justified a significantly reduced award.
Partial indemnity costs were awarded at a substantially lower level than claimed.
Defective manufacture does not constitute an 'occurrence' or 'accident' under a comprehensive general liability insurance policy.
The appellant manufacturer sought coverage under its comprehensive general liability insurance policy for costs incurred to remedy a defective transformer incorporated into its product.
The motions judge held the loss was caused by an 'occurrence' (defined as an accident) but applied an exclusion clause to part of the claim.
On appeal and cross-appeal, the Court of Appeal held that defective manufacture does not constitute an 'accident' or 'occurrence' under the policy.
The cross-appeal was allowed, and a declaration was issued that the policy did not apply to the claim.
