More than 10,000 Canadians received a medically-assisted death in 2021: report
Quebec Superior Court suspends Bill 96’s translation requirement until constitutionality determined
The Ontario government has given Maggie an ultimatum: the disabled teen can lose her funding or her independence
FBI took 11 sets of classified material from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home while investigating possible Espionage Act violations (US)
Ontario class action settlement reclassifies volunteers as employees, setting new precedent
Availability of Judicial Review in SABS Disputes
Are masking policies still valid?
Justice Canada releases commission report on impact of lack of legal aid in family law disputes
Harmonized sales tax part of maximum amount of attendant care benefits owed by insurer: court
New rules coming next month to help Canadians with cancelled and delayed flights
Stephen King set to testify for govt in books merger trial (US)
New law program in Quebec to begin next fall, a first in 50 years
The Impact of the Lack of Legal Aid in Family Law Cases
SCC rules that when someone is required by their partner to wear a condom but do not, they could be guilty of sexual assault.
Big Plastic suing feds over single-use ban — again
Tim Hortons offers coffee and doughnut as proposed settlement in class action lawsuit
The SCC has refused to hear the appeal to declare the renewal of the state of health emergency by the Quebec government invalid
Federal privacy commissioner investigating controversial ArriveCAN app
Kraken, a U.S. Crypto Exchange, Is Suspected of Violating Sanctions (US)
Ontario court certifies class action on former patients’ anxiety from notice of risk of infection
The stakes couldn’t be higher as Canada’s top court decides whether to hear climate class action lawsuit
Professor Barnali Choudhury selected by EU as trade and sustainable development expert
The Supreme Court decision on the ‘Ghomeshi’ amendments will help sexual assault victims access justice
AFN Reaches $20 B Final Settlement Agreement to Compensate First Nations Children and Families

How Canada’s top court just bolstered pandemic BI exclusions

Canada’s top court has dismissed an appeal to challenge damage policy exclusions found in many pandemic-related business interruption insurance cases.

Canada’s top court has dismissed the appeal in a nuclear reactor case that trial lawyers might have used as a precedent to challenge the physical damage policy exclusions found in many pandemic-related business interruption insurance cases.

As is customary, the Supreme Court of Canada does not issue reasons for why it dismisses leaves to appeal.

Lawyers crafting the appeal for MDS Inc. v. Factory Mutual Insurance Company (FM Global) believed the case fit within the top court’s national interest mandate, because it was relevant to the physical damage exclusions contained in many of the insurers’ business interruption policies for businesses forced to shut down during the pandemic.

According to Blaney McMurtry LLP’s Anthony Gatensby and Dominic Clarke, MDS lawyers submitted to the Supreme Court in their leave application that their case was “relevant to issues affecting the Canadian public, including whether the shutdown of a business due to COVID-19 could constitute resulting ‘physical damage’ within the meaning of an ‘all-risk” policy.

“It is well-accepted by both policyholder and insurer counsel that the MDS decision is likely to influence the judicial approach to losses arising from the COVID-19 pandemic,” the Blaney McMurtry lawyers wrote.

As it stands now, the Ontario Court for Appeal’s verdict in MDS is that loss of use of a property is not the same as physical damage to a property, thus it is excluded from coverage. Equating ‘loss of use’ with ‘physical damage’ has been a main line of argument made by trial lawyers in several pandemic BI class action lawsuits.

MDS Inc. v. Factory Mutual Insurance Company centered on whether a policy exclusion for “corrosion,” which went undefined in policy, was ambiguous. It also examined whether “loss of use” of equipment or property is the same as “physical damage” to the property; and hence, is not excluded by the policy.

On Feb. 21, 2006, MDS, a global health science company, agreed to buy radioisotopes from Atomic Energy of Canada Limited to be produced at the Nuclear Research Universal (NRU) reactor located in Chalk River, Ont. They were to be sold worldwide for cardiac imaging, cancer treatments, and sterilization of medical products.

FM Global issued MDS a standard-form, all-risk insurance policy that covers all risks of physical loss or damage to property and contingent time element coverage resulting from a supplier’s business interruption. The policy excluded losses due to “corrosion.” It exempted from the corrosion exclusion any “physical damage not excluded by this policy” at specified locations. The policy limit was US$25 million.

On May 14, 2009, heavy water containing radioactive tritium was discovered leaking through the calandria wall of the NRU reactor. The reactor was shut down for 15 months to repair the leak, which was caused by corrosion. As a result of the shutdown, MDS lost its supplier of radioisotopes and lost profits of approximately CAD$121.2 million.

MDS submitted a claim for lost profits. FM Global denied coverage on Aug. 4, 2009, on the basis that this claim was excluded under the policy because of “corrosion.” Also, the loss of use of the reactor didn’t constitute “physical damage,” which was exempted from the corrosion exclusion.

Ontario’s Appeal Court overturned the trial judge’s decision. The Appeal Court found the meaning of the term “corrosion” in the policy exemption, although not defined, was not ambiguous. More importantly, for legal observers following the pandemic-related business interruption cases, the Appeal Court found in favour of the insurer.

“Read in the context of the policy as a whole, the meaning of the word ‘corrosion’ is clear,” the Ontario Court of Appeal found. “The corrosion exclusion applies and MDS’ losses are not covered by the policy.

“Likewise, the term ‘physical damage’ in the exception to the exclusion clause is clear. It does not apply to economic losses caused by the inability to use the equipment during the shutdown.”


Want direct access to the latest LITN content?

Stay in the loop ➞ Subscribe to LITN instant notifications.
Receive the latest content delivered directly to your device.
Unsubscribe at anytime.

Latest News


Join the LITN Newsletter ➞ the latest news delivered to your inbox. Unsubscribe at any time.


Instagram Feed