Venner v. Sun Life Ins. Co.

Venner v. Sun Life Ins. Co.

Because the policy expressly incorporated the applicant's representations and contained a stipulation that false representations would render the policy null and premiums forfeited, the insured's material and fraudulent misrepresentations rendered the policy void ab initio; the insurer may invoke that nullity against the third‑party payee; there was no novation under art.1180 C.C.; R.S.C. ch.124 secs.27–28 did not operate to validate the policy in these circumstances; insurer was not required to return premiums and the non‑joinder objection was raised too late.

Citation
(1890) 17 SCR 394
Parties
Appellant / Payee / Creditor: William Venner; Respondent / Insurer: Sun Life Insurance Company; Deceased Insured: Jean Langlois
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 March 1890
Procedural Posture
Life Insurance Appeal / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Queen's Bench for Lower Canada (appeal Side)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Warranty, Third‑party Beneficiary, Novation, Assignment, Return of Premium, Non‑joinder
Source Language
English
Insurance Contract Civil Procedure Misrepresentation Warranty Third‑party Beneficiary Novation Assignment +2 more

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Venner

Appellant / Payee / Creditor

Sun Life Insurance Company

Respondent / Insurer

Jean Langlois

Deceased Insured

Procedural Posture

Life Insurance Appeal / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Queen's Bench for Lower Canada (appeal Side)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether fraudulent/untrue answers in the insured's application vitiate an unconditional policy issued in favour of a third‑party payee
  2. 2 Whether insurer must pay a third‑party beneficiary when policy was induced by insured's misrepresentations
  3. 3 Whether insurer is obliged to return premiums when policy is void for fraud and the application/policy contains a forfeiture clause

Ratio Decidendi

Because the policy expressly incorporated the applicant's representations and contained a stipulation that false representations would render the policy null and premiums forfeited, the insured's material and fraudulent misrepresentations rendered the policy void ab initio; the insurer may invoke that nullity against the third‑party payee; there was no novation under art.1180 C.C.; R.S.C. ch.124 secs.27–28 did not operate to validate the policy in these circumstances; insurer was not required to return premiums and the non‑joinder objection was raised too late.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Action dismissed; no recovery of $2,000 by appellant