Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 27 SEPTEMBER 2012

An Insurer’s Duty To Defend In Defamation Cases

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

A plaintiff cannot circumvent a defendant’s insurance coverage for defamation by simply pleading that the publications were made with an intent to injure and with knowledge of their falsity.

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

British Columbia Medical Association v. Aviva, 2011 BCSC 1399, decision rendered October 19, 2011 

A plaintiff cannot circumvent a defendant's insurance coverage for defamation by simply pleading that the publications were made with an intent to injure and with knowledge of their falsity. The British Columbia Supreme Court held on October 19, 2011 that such pleadings will not enable a defendant's insurer to deny coverage by relying on the common policy clause which excludes coverage for acts of intentional wrongdoing.

The British Columbia Medical Association and its board members were sued in defamation. Although they had insurance coverage for defamation claims, their insurer, Aviva, denied coverage by relying on the exclusion clause for acts of intentional wrongdoing. The insurer based its position on the plaintiff's allegations in her statement of claim that the statements at issue constituted a "campaign of vilification" published by the defendants with an

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