Newsletters

495

A Reminder of the Basic Differences Between a Builder’s Risk Policy and a Liability Policy

In the recent case of Bridor inc. c. 90784497 Québec inc., 2022 QCCS 2496, the Superior Court ruled on the fundamental distinctions between a Builder’s Risk policy and a liability insurance policy.

Bridor inc. [Bridor] had retained the services of Construction Milkado [Mikado] as a construction manager to oversee the expansion of its plant. In the main claim, Bridor alleged that Mikado had committed three faults in its management of the construction, one of which consisted of damages caused to architectural panels that made up the outside walls of the expansion. The project and the parties were insured under two policies issued by Starr Insurance & Reinsurance Limited [Starr]: a Wrap-Up liability insurance policy and a Builder’s Risk insurance policy.

In a Wellington type application, Mikado asked the Court to order Starr to take up its interest, and defend it for the damage caused to the panels in virtue of the Builder’s Risk policy

The Court first noted that the Civil Code of Québec provides for two types of damage insurance: liability, and property. Justice Andres C. Garin observed that the legal obligation to take up an insured’s defence, expressed in article 2503 CCQ, is in subdivision III.3 of the chapter of the Code that applies exclusively to liability insurance.

Justice Garin then observed that Builder’s Risk policies are usually property insurance policies . After examining Starr’s policy, the Court concluded that it was in fact a property insurance policy that did not provide for the insurer’s obligation to take up its insured’s interest in case of a claim or lawsuit.

Since Mikado was only raising the Builder’s Risk policy, the Wellington application was dismissed.

Takeaway

  • Builder’s Risk policies are generally property insurance.
  • The object of the insurance must be determined through an analysis of the warranty clause, that defines the scope and nature of the protection provided;
  • In all cases, it is essential to examine all of the clauses in the policy since its designation may sometimes fail to reflect accurately all the coverage that it in fact provides;
  • An insurer is not required to take up its insured’s interest under a Builder’s Risk insurance.
495

Authors

Articles in the same category

When the Remedy Becomes the Dispute: Medical Liability Under Scrutiny

In the case N.L. v. Mathieu, 2025 QCCS 517, the Superior Court dismissed a medical liability lawsuit filed by a teacher against her former family doctor, in which she sought over $1.9 million in damages. The plaintiff accused her doctor of having inappropriately prescribed medication over several years, without proper follow-up and without informing her […]

Bill 89 and the Future of Labour Disputes in Quebec

Passed by the National Assembly on May 29, 2025, Bill 89 (An Act to give greater consideration to the needs of the population in the event of a strike or a lock-out, hereinafter the “Bill”) will come into force on November 30, 2025. The Bill, which has faced strong opposition from unions, will bring significant […]

Latent Defects: Notice Must Be Given, but to Whom, When and How? The Court of Appeal Answers

On this past September 26, in the context of a claim for latent defects, in the matter of Meyer v. Pichette (Estate of Morin), 2025 QCCA 1193, the Court of appeal confirmed a Superior Court judgment which dismissed proceedings in warranty brought against former vendors as sufficient notice of the defects was not provided prior […]

You Should Not Believe Everything you Read on Social Media…

In a recent decision, Boucal v. Rancourt-Maltais, the Superior Court reviewed the principles applicable to defamation cases. Facts The Defendant is a member of a private Facebook group called “Féministes Bas-St-Laurent”. In this group, Ms. Khadidiatou Yewwi allegedly posted testimony about the Plaintiff. Stating that she was troubled by the testimony and had herself heard […]

The Window of Conflict and Police Officers

In the case of Souccar v. Pathmasiri, rendered on June 11, the Quebec Superior Court was called upon to decide on a civil liability claim regarding an allegedly abusive arrest and detention. The dispute arose from a condominium disagreement concerning the installation of windows. Police Intervention In July 2016, window installers hired by the condominium […]

Same Approach, Same Result… Yet Again!

Last June, we published a newsletter following the decision rendered in Michel Grenier v. Me Julie Charbonneau, Roger Picard and Conseil de discipline de l’Ordre des psychologues du Québec. This decision followed the filing by the Defendants of Motions to Dismiss, which were granted by the judge of the Superior court. At the time the […]