Wright v. Canadian Group Underwriters Insurance Co.,

• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Judge: Finch, C.J.B.C., Ryan and Low, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Citation: 2002 BCCA 254,(2002), 167 B.C.A.C. 268 (CA)
• Date: 11 January 2002

Wright v. Cdn. Group (2002), 167 B.C.A.C. 268 (CA);

    274 W.A.C. 268

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2002] B.C.A.C. TBEd. AP.052

Rebecca Wright (respondent/plaintiff) v. Canadian Group Underwriters Insurance Co. (appellant/defendant)

(CA027493; 2002 BCCA 254)

Indexed As: Wright v. Canadian Group Underwriters Insurance Co.

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Finch, C.J.B.C., Ryan and Low, JJ.A.

April 18, 2002.

Summary:

Holt and Dubois boarded horses on their property. The plaintiff rented a room in their house. The plaintiff was injured in a horse­back riding accident on the property. She obtained default judgment against Holt and Dubois for negligence. Holt and Dubois had a homeowner's comprehensive insurance policy that contained an exclusionary clause permitting the insurer to deny liability if the plaintiff was "residing in" the insurance household at the time that she was injured in the accident. At issue on a rule 18A sum­mary application was whether Holt and Dubois's insurer was liable to the plaintiff under the policy.

The British Columbia Supreme Court, in a decision reported at [2000] B.C.T.C. 482, held that while the plaintiff was living in the Holt-Dubois household at the time of her injury, she was not "residing there". Thus, she was not caught by the exclusionary clause. The insurer appealed.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Insurance - Topic 6823

Liability insurance - Homeowner's com­prehensive policy - Exclusions - Residing in same household - A tenant obtained judgment for damages against the insured property owners - Their homeowner's comprehensive policy included third party liability - Excluded were claims from "...bodily injury...to any person residing in your household other than a residence employee..." - The tenant was a stranger with no family connection to either owner - She paid rent and lived in a portion of the house full-time for six weeks before her accident - She did not become part of a living unit with the owners in a family or collective relationship - The British Columbia Court of Appeal affirmed that the tenant was not "residing in" the house­hold, and the exclusion was inapplicable - She was neither "in" nor "of" the house­hold - See paragraphs 23 to 43.

Cases Noticed:

Gecho v. BCAA Insurance Corp. et al. (1997), 92 B.C.A.C. 120; 150 W.A.C. 120; 35 B.C.L.R.(3d) 82 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].

Appel et al. v. Dominion of Canada Gen­eral Insurance Co. (1997), 95 B.C.A.C. 122; 154 W.A.C. 122; 39 B.C.L.R.(3d) 113 (C.A.), consd. [para. 10].

Reid Crowther & Partners Ltd. v. Simcoe & Erie General Insurance Co., [1993] 1 S.C.R. 252; 147 N.R. 44; 83 Man.R.(2d) 81; 36 W.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 14].

Fulford v. Townshend, [1970] 3 O.R. 493 (Co. Ct.), refd to. [para. 23].

Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Co. v. Bell, [1957] S.C.R. 581; 8 D.L.R.(2d) 577, affing. (1956), 5 D.L.R.(2d) 759 (C.A.), affing. [1956] O.W.N. 733 (H.C.), consd. [para. 30].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Words and Phrases (Perm. Ed.), vol. 19, p. 701 [para. 33].

Counsel:

A.R. Borzoni, for the appellant;

J.R. Jordan, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard before Finch, C.J.B.C., Ryan and Low, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal, at Victoria, British Columbia, on January 11, 2002. The decision of the court was delivered by Low, J.A., on April 18, 2002, at Vancouver, Brit­ish Columbia.