Ipapo Estate v. Citadel Life Insurance Co., (1986) 47 Man.R.(2d) 286 (QB)

• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada)
• Case Date: December 09, 1986
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (1986), 47 Man.R.(2d) 286 (QB)

Ipapo Estate v. Citadel Life (1986), 47 Man.R.(2d) 286 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Nazario Caisido Ipapo, as Administrator of the Estate of Felina Caisido Ipapo v. Citadel Life Insurance Company

(Suit No. 86-01-11282)

Indexed As: Ipapo Estate v. Citadel Life Insurance Co.

Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench

Winnipeg Centre

Scott, A.C.J.Q.B.

December 9, 1986.

Summary:

The plaintiff designated a particular officer of the defendant for discovery purposes. The plaintiff applied to compel the defendant company to produce the officer designated.

The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench allowed the plaintiff's application.

Practice - Topic 4243

Discovery - Examination - Persons who may be examined - Corporations - Designation of officer of - The plaintiff estate sued to recover life insurance benefits from the insurer - The insurer alleged material misrepresentations in the application for reinstatement of the policy - The plaintiff estate sought to examine the insurer's representative who attended to the reinstatement - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench allowed the insurer's representative to be examined, as an "officer" of the defendant corporation, because this employee had the most personal knowledge of the facts and matters in dispute - The court rejected arguments that the employee's answers would unfairly bind the corporation, put the corporation in a conflict of interest or prolong discovery.

Words and Phrases

Officer - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench discussed the meaning of the word "officer" as found in Queen's Bench Rule 286(1).

Cases Noticed:

College Housing Co-Operative Limited et al. v. Baxter Student Housing Limited et al., [1975] 3 W.W.R. 379 (Man. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 3].

Kent Drugs Limited v. Kronson and 61462 Manitoba Ltd. (1986), 43 Man.R.(2d) 261 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 3].

Canadian Doughnut Company v. Canadian Egg Products Limited (1952), 5 W.W.R.(N.S.) 428 (Sask. Q.B.), affd. (1952), 6 W.W.R.(N.S.) 684 (Sask. C.A.), not appld. [para. 4].

Yamashita v. Hudson Bay Insurance Company, [1918] 3 W.W.R. 671 (S.C.C.), not appld. [para. 4].

Trewin v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Company, [1938] 1 W.W.R. 303 (S.C.C.), not appld. [para. 4].

Kearney v. Ocean Accident and Guarantee Corporation, [1942] O.W.N. 166 (H.C.), not appld. [para. 4].

Mimeault v. Standard Insurance Company of New York, [1950] O.W.N. 244 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 4].

Statutes Noticed:

Rules of Court (Man.), rule 286(1).

Counsel:

Leonard M. French, for the plaintiff;

Allan H. Adam, for the defendant.

This application was heard before Scott, A.C.J.Q.B., of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, Winnipeg Centre, whose decision was delivered on December 9, 1986.