Sin Mac Lines Ltd. Et al. v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co. Et al.

Sin Mac Lines Ltd. Et al. v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co. Et al.

The printed explosion exclusion and the typewritten clause limiting liability to that part 'actually caused by fire' must be given effect; therefore recovery is limited to the portion of the loss attributable to fire (not the disruptive force of the explosion), and the appellants’ recovery is confined to that fire damage (15% of the total loss as found below).

Citation
[1936] SCR 598
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Sin Mac Lines Limited and Others; Respondent/defendant: Hartford Fire Insurance Company and Others
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 May 1936
Procedural Posture
Fire Insurance Dispute on Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King’s Bench, Province of Quebec (affirming Superior Court)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Fire Insurance, Explosion Exclusion Clause, Causation, Policy Construction, Quebec Insurance Act Condition 11
Source Language
English
Insurance Contract Interpretation Fire Insurance Explosion Exclusion Clause Causation Policy Construction Quebec Insurance Act Condition 11

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sin Mac Lines Limited and Others

Appellant/plaintiff

Hartford Fire Insurance Company and Others

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Fire Insurance Dispute on Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King’s Bench, Province of Quebec (affirming Superior Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether loss caused by explosion is recoverable under a fire-only policy
  2. 2 Whether the printed explosion exclusion applies when explosion occurs during or concurrent with a fire
  3. 3 Whether typewritten clauses supersede or modify the printed exclusion clause

Ratio Decidendi

The printed explosion exclusion and the typewritten clause limiting liability to that part 'actually caused by fire' must be given effect; therefore recovery is limited to the portion of the loss attributable to fire (not the disruptive force of the explosion), and the appellants’ recovery is confined to that fire damage (15% of the total loss as found below).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Judgment below affirmed; respondents liable only for that part of the loss attributable to fire (court fixed recovery at $4,475.94 with interest and costs)