Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 18 DECEMBER 2017

Case Summary: Reeb v. The Guarantee Company Of North America

Two 14 year old boys (Reeb and Riley) were playing with pellet guns. Reeb shot Riley, who consequently lost an eye.

CanadaInsurance

I. INSURANCE ISSUES

D. An insurer-appointed defence counsel will be in conflict of interest if the interests of the insurer and the insured are not in alignment, and in such cases the Court may appoint independent counsel (an amicus curae or Cumis counsel) to defend the insured at the insurer's expense.

Reeb v. The Guarantee Company of North America, 2017 ONCA 771 per Sharpe, Lauwers and Roberts JJ.A. [4253]

I. FACTS AND ISSUES

Two 14 year old boys (Reeb and Riley) were playing with pellet guns. Reeb shot Riley, who consequently lost an eye. The underlying action was against Reeb, his mother, and his father (who were separated at the time).

Reeb's mother had homeowner's insurance through Royal & Sunlife which had a third party liability limit of $1 million. Riley's claim was for $1.5 million. The insurer appointed counsel to defend the claim under a reservation of rights while it investigated coverage.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from