The obligation to defend: the case of GéodexThe obligation to defend: the case of Géodexhttp://chad.ca/en/members/professional-practice/industry/liability/191/the-obligation-to-defend-the-case-of-geodex

​This summary does not constitute a legal opinion. The information it contains may not reflect the current state of the law.

Over the course of time the Supreme Court of Canada’s has distinguished the obligation to defend from the obligation to indemnify.

The most recent Quebec Court of Appeal decision on the matter is Géodex. In this recent decision Justice Dalphond upholds these well established principles and proceeds to suggest four approaches for trial judges who are seized with Wellington Motions and must follow the path drawn by the Supreme Court of Canada to decide on the obligations to defend.

Justice Dalphond’s decision in Géodex clarifies the obligation to defend by allowing two attorneys to represent an insured and by setting aside the Conservatory Intervention.

8/15/2014 2:53:07 PMhttp://docs.chad.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/2006-10-chadpresse-force-to-defend-case-of-geodox-an.pdf