Taylor v. The London Assurance Corporation et al.

Taylor v. The London Assurance Corporation et al.

The statutory term 'fraudulently' requires actual fraud; respondents disclaimed and did not plead actual fraud and could not rely on it; the evidence did not show the insurer's agent was misled or that any statement influenced issuance of the policies; therefore the statutory condition did not void the policies and the appeal succeeds.

Citation
[1935] SCR 422
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: John R. Taylor; Respondents/defendants: The London Assurance Corporation and Other Assurance Companies
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 May 1935
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (insurance) / On Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Ontario
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment for appellant.
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Fraudulent Omission, Utmost Good Faith, Statutory Condition 1 (s.98) Insurance Act R.s.o. 1927
Source Language
English
Insurance Contract Law Civil Procedure Misrepresentation Fraudulent Omission Utmost Good Faith Statutory Condition 1 (s.98) Insurance Act R.s.o. 1927

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John R. Taylor

Appellant/plaintiff

The London Assurance Corporation and Other Assurance Companies

Respondents/defendants

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (insurance) / On Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Ontario

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the statutory condition voids a policy for misrepresentation or a 'fraudulent' omission
  2. 2 What meaning attaches to the word 'fraudulently' in the statutory condition
  3. 3 Whether the omission or statement amounted to actual fraud

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory term 'fraudulently' requires actual fraud; respondents disclaimed and did not plead actual fraud and could not rely on it; the evidence did not show the insurer's agent was misled or that any statement influenced issuance of the policies; therefore the statutory condition did not void the policies and the appeal succeeds.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment for appellant.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed; judgment entered for appellant for the amount claimed with costs throughout.