Zaidi v. Alliance Assurance Co., (1974) 6 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 521 (NFSC)

• Court: Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador (Canada)
• Case Date: February 16, 1973
• Jurisdiction: Newfoundland and Labrador
• Citations: (1974), 6 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 521 (NFSC)

Zaidi v. Alliance Assurance (1974), 6 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 521 (NFSC)

MLB headnote and full text

Zaidi v. Alliance Assurance Company Ltd.

Indexed As: Zaidi v. Alliance Assurance Co.

Newfoundland Supreme Court

Furlong, C.J.N.

August 27, 1974.

Summary:

This case arose out of a claim by an insured under a fire insurance policy with respect to damage to a dwelling house. The insured claimed for water damage resulting from the freezing and bursting of the water pipes in the house. During a fire in the house a fireman disconnected the electricity supply in the basement of the house. The house was saved but the owner did not start the furnace until the next day. During the night the water pipes froze and burst. The insured attempted to contact a tenant without success in order to gain access to the furnace room in the basement of the house. The insured also attempted without success to contact furnace suppliers.

The Supreme Court dismissed the insured's action under the insurance policy for payment of the cost of repairs due to the water damage. The Supreme Court held that the insured did not take adequate steps to protect the damaged property as required by Statutory Condition 9(1) of the Fire Insurance Act.

Insurance - Topic 5680

Fire insurance - Duties of the insured - Salvage - Protection of the damaged property - During a house fire a fireman disconnected the electricity supply in the basement of a house - The house was saved but the owner did not start the furnace until the next day - During the night the water pipes froze and burst and further damaged the insured premises - Whether the insured took all reasonable steps to start the furnace - After the fire the insured telephoned a tenant and furnace suppliers without success - The Newfoundland Supreme Court held that the insured did not take adequate steps to protect the property - The Supreme Court dismissed the insured's action under the policy for payment of the cost of repairs due to the water damage.

Statutes Noticed:

Fire Insurance Act, R.S.N. 1970, c. 130, Statutory Condition 9(1).

Counsel:

Fabian A. O'Dea, Q.C., for the plaintiff;

Ernest G. Reid, for the defendant.

This case was heard by FURLONG, C.J.N., on February 16, 1973. Judgment was delivered by FURLONG, C.J.N., on August 27, 1974.