We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-6 of 6

The helicopter, the horse and the duty to defend on appeal

  • Norton Rose Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • January 13 2010

In a decision rendered on October 29, 2009 in Hôtels Fairmont Inc. v. Schecter, the Quebec Court of Appeal was presented once again with an opportunity to clarify the limits of an insurer’s duty to defend, in a lawsuit set against what was in some respects an unusual factual background

The recourses of the Quebec Health Insurance Board and the Government of Quebec against persons responsible for bodily injury

  • Norton Rose Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • October 19 2009

Whether companies work in the services sector or the manufacturing sector, they occasionally face claims for bodily injury

An insured may be represented by more than one lawyer in some circumstances

  • Norton Rose Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • September 30 2009

In Gagnon c. Sinotte, a decision handed down by the Quebec Court of Appeal on August 13, 2009, the Court recognized the right of a liability insurer whose insured is the subject of a countersuit to appoint an attorney to take up the defence other than the attorney already representing the insured in the principal action

Suits between liability insurers now possible in Quebec

  • Norton Rose Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • September 4 2009

The question of whether a liability insurer that had paid out an indemnity owing to the negligence of its insured could seek reimbursement of a portion of that indemnity from another insurer covering the same risk had in recent years been the subject of debate in Quebec law

When a liability insurer hesitates in taking up the insured's defence does it risk losing the right to appoint counsel?

  • Norton Rose Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • July 3 2009

The Quebec Court of Appeal recently had a chance to address this issue in Entreprises M. Bourget inc. c. Compagnie d'assurances Missisquoi

The Quebec Court of Appeal innovates by recognizing “potential subrogation”

  • Norton Rose Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • June 19 2009

The facts in Kingsway are quite straightforward