UVicSpace

Personal Responsibility for Intentional Conduct: Protecting the Interests of Innocent Co-Insureds Under Insurance Contracts

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Adjin-Tettey, Elizabeth
dc.date.accessioned 2015-01-15T23:26:10Z
dc.date.available 2015-01-15T23:26:10Z
dc.date.copyright 2013 en_US
dc.date.issued 2013
dc.identifier.citation Elizabeth Adjin-Tettey, “Personal Responsibility for Intentional Conduct: Protecting the Interests of Innocent Co-Insureds Under Insurance Contracts” (2013) 50(3) Alberta Law Review 615-630. en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/1828/5855
dc.description This is a post-print version of this paper, published in the Alberta Law Review, (2013) 50(3) pp. 615-630. An abbreviated version of this article was published as Elizabeth Adjin-Tettey, “Protecting the Interests of the Innocent Insured,” The Lawyers Weekly 31:33 (13 January 2012) 12. en_US
dc.description.abstract An insured who wilfully damages insured property cannot seek indemnification under an insurance policy because the loss was not a fortuitous one and likely falls within an exclusion clause in the policy. This has historically been referred to as the criminal forfeiture principle, which holds that for public policy reasons a wrongdoer should not be able to benefit from his or her own wrongdoing. The question in situations like this is whether an innocent co-insured should also be barred from recovery for such loss. This article focuses on developments in the law relating to recovery by an innocent co-insured — namely amendments to the British Columbia Insurance Act. The author explores the history of the criminal forfeiture principle and also examines the modern contractual approach to interpreting insurance contracts. This article argues that the modern approach emphasizes property and contract law principles at the expense of protecting the reasonable expectations of an innocent co-insured. The author then examines a key provision in the British Columbia Insurance Act that intends to provide statutory protection for an innocent co-insured. Despite some disadvantages, the author argues that the benefits of the statutory protection outweigh any potential weaknesses. en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Alberta Law Review en_US
dc.title Personal Responsibility for Intentional Conduct: Protecting the Interests of Innocent Co-Insureds Under Insurance Contracts en_US
dc.type Article en_US
dc.description.scholarlevel Faculty en_US
dc.description.reviewstatus Reviewed en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search UVicSpace


Browse

My Account

Statistics

Help