|Blended Families: The Court of Appeal Resolves the Debate||Blended Families: The Court of Appeal Resolves the Debate||http://chad.ca/en/members/professional-practice/industry/liability/189/blended-families-the-court-of-appeal-resolves-the-debate|
This summary does not constitute a legal opinion. The information it contains may not reflect the current state of the law.
In 2003, Philippe, age 12, ran over a lady while he was riding his bicycle. The lady suffered serious injuries and sued Philippe and Promutuel Portneuf-Champlain, the liability insurer of
Philippe’s grandfather — in whose home Philippe and his mother were living at the time of the accident — for more than $350,000 in damages. The action was later settled between the parties for $150,000.
Portneuf-Champlain instituted an action in warranty against Promutuel Lévisienne-Orléans, the liability insurer of Philippe’s father. Portneuf- Champlain claimed that Lévisienne-Orléans was also a liability insurer of Philippe on the basis that he was an insured within the meaning of the father’s policy because he “lived under the same roof” as his father. According to Portneuf-Champlain, there was overlapping insurance and the other liability insurer was responsible for 50% of the settlement, or $75,000.
|8/15/2014 2:39:39 PM||http://docs.chad.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/2009-12-chadpresse-blended-families-an.pdf|