London Insurance Co. v. Chase

London Insurance Co. v. Chase

The courts below correctly applied the balance of probabilities standard, properly weighed the improbability of suicide against the cogency of the evidence and the complete absence of motive, and the insurer failed to prove suicide so the policy exclusion did not apply; appeal dismissed.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1963] SCR 207
Parties
Defendant/appellant: London Life Insurance Company; Plaintiff/respondent: Mary Catherine Chase
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 March 1963
Procedural Posture
Life Insurance Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Manitoba
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Suicide Defence, Standard of Proof, Burden of Proof, Presumption Against Suicide, Motive Evidence
Source Language
english
Insurance Life Insurance Civil Procedure Evidence Suicide Defence Standard of Proof Burden of Proof Presumption Against Suicide +1 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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

London Life Insurance Company

Defendant/appellant

Mary Catherine Chase

Plaintiff/respondent

Procedural Posture

Life Insurance Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Manitoba

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether death was suicide or accidental for purposes of policy exclusion
  2. 2 Whether the proper standard of proof was applied by the courts below and what burden rests on insurer alleging suicide

Ratio Decidendi

The courts below correctly applied the balance of probabilities standard, properly weighed the improbability of suicide against the cogency of the evidence and the complete absence of motive, and the insurer failed to prove suicide so the policy exclusion did not apply; appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Order of trial judge that respondent recover the proceeds of the insurance policy affirmed