The appellant insurer appealed a judgment declaring a life insurance policy valid, arguing fraudulent misrepresentation by the insured regarding a criminal conviction.
The policy had been in force for over five years, triggering an incontestability clause under the Insurance Act, requiring the insurer to prove fraud.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the insurer's appeal and motion to admit fresh evidence.
While acknowledging the application judge erred in disregarding admissions of the conviction, the Court found this error did not alter the ultimate conclusion that the insurer failed to prove the misrepresentation was made with the intent required for civil fraud (knowledge or recklessness), concluding it was likely due to mistake or negligence.
