Newsletters

434

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.
434

Authors

Nathan Hassan Omar

Lawyer, Associate

Articles in the same category

The Excavator Lost Its Mind, But The Court Of Appeal Did Not!

You may recall our newsletter of July 17, 2023, summarizing a judgment concerning the important burden placed on a manufacturer by the Civil Code of Québec (C.C.Q.). In AIG Insurance Company of Canada et al. v. Mécano Mobile R.L. Inc. et al. 2023 QCCS 1935, the Superior Court dismissed the insurer’s claim against the manufacturer/seller, […]

Fraudulent Statements: Always a Question of Credibility… and of Interest!

In a recent judgment, the Court of Appeal reviews and confirms the Superior Court’s decision in Paul-Hus v. Sun Life Assurance Company, which was commented on in our newsletter of October 31, 2023. Review of the facts On March 13, 2015, Automobiles Illimitées, of which the applicant Paul-Hus is the sole shareholder, applied for a […]

Construction and Loss of the Work: When Does the Countdown Start?

When it comes to prescription, it is often difficult to determine a starting point and a precise calculation, especially when the damage or loss manifests gradually. This issue was analyzed in a very recent judgment rendered by the Honourable Marie Ève Bélanger in Syndicat des Copropriétaires du 600, de la Gare v. Village de la […]

Bill 56 — Family Law Reform and Parental Union Regime

The National Assembly of Quebec has adopted Bill 56 entitled An Act respecting family law reform and establishing the parental union regime, which will come into force on June 30, 2025. This initiative will introduce the parental union regime which will apply to de facto spouses that will become parents of the same child after […]

When Water Rules Out Any Possibility of Compensation

The Superior Court recently ruled on the interpretation of an exclusion clause for damages resulting from a flood, in Gestion Michel Bernard inc. v. Promutuel Chaudière-Appalaches, Société mutuelle d’assurance générale[1]. Summary of the Facts The Plaintiffs are the owners of a building located in Beauceville and the operators of a restaurant located in that building. […]

Estate Planning: Don’t Overlook Your Safe Deposit Box

Whether you have an estate plan in place or are in the process of estate planning or you have procrastinated about estate planning, you may wish to consider the pros and cons of a safe deposit box (also commonly called a safety deposit box) in your estate plan. At one time, safe deposit boxes were […]