Capitol Steel Corporation v. R. Litz & Sons Company Limited et al.
Capitol Steel Corporation
R. Litz & Sons Company Limited
Law Firm / Organization
Pitblado LLP
Lawyer(s)

Jeffrey A. Baigrie

Avec Insurance Managers Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Great American Insurance Company
Law Firm / Organization
Davidson Cahill Morrison LLP
Northbridge General Insurance Corporation
Law Firm / Organization
Davidson Cahill Morrison LLP
Aviva Insurance Company of Canada
Law Firm / Organization
Davidson Cahill Morrison LLP
Boiler Inspection And Insurance Company Of Canada
Law Firm / Organization
Davidson Cahill Morrison LLP
GCAN Insurance Company
Law Firm / Organization
Fillmore Riley LLP
Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance
Law Firm / Organization
Fillmore Riley LLP
Continental Casualty Company
Law Firm / Organization
Whitelaw Twining (WT BCA LLP)
Lawyer(s)

May Mehrabi

Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation
  • Facts: Capitol Steel Corporation filed a motion to add GCAN Insurance Company, Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Company of Canada, and Continental Casualty Company as respondents in an application for insurance coverage determinations following incidents in 2013 involving damage to steel girders transported by R. Litz & Sons Company Ltd., which became insolvent in 2017. Capitol's claim exceeds three million dollars.

  • Issue: Whether Capitol Steel Corporation can amend its Notice of Application to include additional insurers as respondents before obtaining a judgment against R. Litz & Sons Company Ltd. for the incidents causing damage to steel girders.

  • Court's Ruling: The Court of King's Bench of Manitoba dismissed Capitol's motion to amend its Notice of Application. The court ruled based on Section 127(1) of The Insurance Act that Capitol's action against the insurers was premature without first obtaining a judgment against Litz, emphasizing the statutory requirement for an unsatisfied judgment against the insured before a third party can claim against an insurer.

  • Costs/Damages Awarded: Tariff costs were awarded to the insurers, though the decision did not specify the amount. If Capitol and the insurers cannot agree on the amount, they were instructed to return to the court for a determination.

Court of King's Bench Manitoba
CI 18-01-16868
Insurance law
Other