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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results:1-10 of 96

Supreme Court finds coverage for construction defect claim
  • McMillan LLP
  • Canada
  • October 13 2010

In Progressive Homes Ltd v Lombard General Insurance Co. of Canada, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a general contractor’s defective workmanship can constitute an “accident”, thereby triggering an insurance company’s duty to defend a general contractor against construction deficiency claims.


Duty to defend turns on nature of plaintiff's allegations and on policy language
  • Norton Rose Fulbright
  • Canada
  • October 13 2010

In a very recent judgment pertaining to a commercial general liability (CGL) policy, the Supreme Court of Canada has reiterated that the duty to defend is triggered by the mere possibility that a claim is covered by the insurance policy and does not depend on actual liability or on an actual duty to indemnify.


Supreme Court of Canada addresses insurer’s duty to defend in the context of a leaky condo case
  • Fasken
  • Canada
  • September 28 2010

The decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Progressive Homes Ltd. v. Lombard General Insurance Company of Canada, 2010 SCC 33 resolves a discrepancy between decisions of the Courts of Appeal of British Columbia and Ontario on an important point concerning the scope of Commercial General Liability insurance policies as they apply to construction projects.


CGL update: more on the subcontractor exception and the "your work" exclusion
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • September 9 2009

In the recent decision of the B.C. Court of Appeal in Progressive Homes Limited v. Lombard General Insurance Co (March, 2009), the majority upheld a lower court ruling that declared that Lombard had no duty to defend Progressive under four successive CGL policies as a result of four separate actions brought against Progressive by the B.C. Housing Management Commission (“B.C. Housing”).


Supreme Court of Canada rules owner in tendering process owes no duty of care to subcontractors
  • Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • Canada
  • May 12 2008

In Design Services Ltd. v. Canada, Public Works and Government Services Canada (the Owner) launched a tendering process for the construction of a naval reserve building in St. John’s, Newfoundland.


Force majeure clauses in construction contracts
  • Dentons
  • Canada
  • March 13 2008

The primary purposes of construction contracts are to clarify responsibilities (including performance and payment obligations) and to allocate risk.


Michael Turrini
  • White & Case LLP

Nicholas Caughey
  • WeirFoulds LLP


André Legrand
  • Norton Rose Fulbright