Blanchette v. C.I.S. Ltd.

Blanchette v. C.I.S. Ltd.

Majority: misrepresentation about prior losses was material only to liability risk and did not void fire coverage for the tractors; agent Raiche possessed at least apparent authority under company practice to accept applications and represent immediate coverage and insurer is bound by his acts; applicant who authorized agent by telephone and could not verify the completed form should not suffer for agent’s failure to complete it properly; trial judge should have recused himself for reasonable apprehension of bias — accordingly appeal allowed, prior judgments set aside and new trial ordered.

Citation
[1973] SCR 833
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Laurier Blanchette; Defendant/respondent: C.I.S. Ltd.
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 May 1973
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil Insurance) / Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan
Outcome
Appeal allowed (majority); judgment of Court of Appeal reversed; judgment of Court of Queen’s Bench set aside; new trial ordered; Ritchie J. dissenting.
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Apparent Authority, Proposal/application Forms, Coverage Effective Date, Reasonable Apprehension of Bias, Statutory Condition Voidance
Source Language
English
Insurance Agency Civil Procedure Judicial Recusal Misrepresentation Apparent Authority Proposal/application Forms Coverage Effective Date +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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Laurier Blanchette

Plaintiff/appellant

C.I.S. Ltd.

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil Insurance) / Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether misrepresentation in application voids coverage for the tractor loss under statutory condition 1
  2. 2 Whether agent had authority or apparent authority to bind insurer as to immediate coverage
  3. 3 Whether applicant who signed form but left parts blank is bound by agent’s later incorrect entries made with applicant’s telephone authorization

Ratio Decidendi

Majority: misrepresentation about prior losses was material only to liability risk and did not void fire coverage for the tractors; agent Raiche possessed at least apparent authority under company practice to accept applications and represent immediate coverage and insurer is bound by his acts; applicant who authorized agent by telephone and could not verify the completed form should not suffer for agent’s failure to complete it properly; trial judge should have recused himself for reasonable apprehension of bias — accordingly appeal allowed, prior judgments set aside and new trial ordered.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed (majority); judgment of Court of Appeal reversed; judgment of Court of Queen’s Bench set aside; new trial ordered; Ritchie J. dissenting.

Orders

  • Allow appeal
  • Reverse judgment of the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan