Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 21 JUNE 2013

Some Welcome Clarification Of Policy Interpretation For Insurers

Alexander Holburn Beaudin + Lang LLP
Explore more from Alexander Holburn Beaudin + Lang LLP

The Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Turpin v. The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company, 2013 BCCA 282, helps bring certainty back to the interpretation of insurance policies with respect to the application of the "reasonable expectations" principle.

CanadaInsurance

The Court of Appeal's recent decision in Turpin v. The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company, 2013 BCCA 282, helps bring certainty back to the interpretation of insurance policies with respect to the application of the "reasonable expectations" principle. 

In Turpin, the Plaintiff had experienced abdominal pain and sought medical treatment shortly before purchasing a travel insurance policy. She then travelled to California and, within a day of her arrival, again experienced abdominal pain and sought treatment. The Plaintiff incurred significant medical expenses and sought indemnity under her travel insurance policy. The claim was denied on the basis of an exclusion for pre-existing medical conditions. The trial court held that the policy was not ambiguous, and that the Plaintiff's abdominal pain was a continuation of a pre-existing condition. However, the court then went on to find that, despite the Plaintiff not having read the insurance policy, she had a

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