Morin v. Canadian Home Assurance Co.

Morin v. Canadian Home Assurance Co.

The Court held prescription cannot run before the insurer's right to sue arose; the insurer's right arose on the dates it paid the claims under the policy (and on the date of payment with subrogation), and the interruption under art.2224 continued until those payments; therefore the insurer's action was not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1970] SCR 561
Parties
Defendant/appellant: Gilles Morin; Plaintiff/respondent: Canadian Home Assurance Company
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 January 1970
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Supreme Court of Canada Appeal From Court of Queen's Bench (appeal Side), Province of Quebec
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Start of Prescription, Subrogation Rights, Recourse/recovery by Insurer, Effect of Settlement, Minor's Liability
Source Language
english
Insurance Law Prescription (limitation) Civil Procedure Tort (quasi Delict) Subrogation Start of Prescription Subrogation Rights Recourse/recovery by Insurer +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gilles Morin

Defendant/appellant

Canadian Home Assurance Company

Plaintiff/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Supreme Court of Canada Appeal From Court of Queen's Bench (appeal Side), Province of Quebec

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether insurer's action to recover sums paid is prescribed
  2. 2 Whether prescription begins at date of accident or at date of insurer's payment
  3. 3 Whether out-of-court settlement extinguishes interruption under Civil Code art.2224

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held prescription cannot run before the insurer's right to sue arose; the insurer's right arose on the dates it paid the claims under the policy (and on the date of payment with subrogation), and the interruption under art.2224 continued until those payments; therefore the insurer's action was not prescribed and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Respondent awarded judgment for $10,485 with interest and costs