Prystupa v. Desjardins Financial Security Life Assurance Co., (2015) 333 O.A.C. 396 (CA)

• Judge: Hoy, A.C.J.O., Watt and Brown, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ontario)
• Case Date: April 17, 2015
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (2015), 333 O.A.C. 396 (CA);2015 ONCA 298

Prystupa v. Desjardins Financial (2015), 333 O.A.C. 396 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] O.A.C. TBEd. MY.001

Katrina Prystupa (applicant/appellant) v. Desjardins Financial Security Life Assurance Company (respondent/respondent)

(C59512; 2015 ONCA 298)

Indexed As: Prystupa v. Desjardins Financial Security Life Assurance Co.

Ontario Court of Appeal

Hoy, A.C.J.O., Watt and Brown, JJ.A.

May 1, 2015.

Summary:

Minutes of settlement resolved an action commenced by Prystupa in which she had sought payment of disability benefits under a group insurance policy. Prystupa applied for a declaration that the Minutes be interpreted so that the direct offset provisions of the policy concerning CPP disability benefits did not apply to her.

The Ontario Superior Court dismissed the application. Prystupa appealed.

The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Contracts - Topic 7406

Interpretation - General principles - Interpretation by context - [See Insurance - Topic 3579 ].

Contracts - Topic 7425

Interpretation - Ambiguity - General - [See Insurance - Topic 3579 ].

Insurance - Topic 3579

Accident and sickness insurance - The contract - Interpretation of terms - Deductions from amount payable - Minutes of Settlement resolved an action commenced by Prystupa in which she had sought payment of disability benefits under a group insurance policy - Prystupa applied for a declaration that the Minutes be interpreted so that the direct offset provisions of the policy concerning CPP disability benefits did not apply to her - The application judge interpreted the Minutes and the Release as amending only certain terms of the policy, with the result that the LTD benefits would be subject to the CPP offset provision - The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal - The Minutes had to be interpreted in light of the context in which they arose: the proper treatment of CPP disability benefits was not in issue in the action - The Minutes did not contain any discussion/modification of the policy's general provision that LTD benefits were to be reduced by any CPP disability benefits - It was open to the application judge to conclude that "when [Prystupa] agreed that the policy provisions would still be in effect, subject to the amendments in the Minutes of Settlement, the clear implication is that any deductions for Canada pension found in the policy itself would still be applicable." - There was no ambiguity - The Minutes were the product of a negotiated settlement with counsel for both parties participating.

Practice - Topic 9864

Settlements - Interpretation - [See Insurance - Topic 3579 ].

Cases Noticed:

Sattva Capital Corp. v. Creston Moly Corp. - see Creston Moly Corp. v. Sattva Capital Corp.

Creston Moly Corp. v. Sattva Capital Corp., [2014] 2 S.C.R. 633; 461 N.R. 335; 358 B.C.A.C. 1; 614 W.A.C. 1; 2014 SCC 53, appld. [para. 15].

Holmes v. Desjardins Financial Security Life Assurance Co., 2014 ONSC 4695, refd to. [para. 21].

Counsel:

Allan Rouben, for the appellant;

Grace Patenall and Emily Caputo, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on April 17, 2015, before Hoy, A.C.J.O., Watt and Brown, JJ.A., of the Ontario Court of Appeal. The Court delivered the following judgment, with reasons, dated May 1, 2015.