Rishi Dhir

How is representation and warranty insurance transforming Canadian M&A transactions? In this episode (https://bit.ly/4lWFLS2), Mario Nigro speaks with Rishi Dhir of WTW about its growing adoption in the midmarket and impact on deal structures.   #LegalInsights #MandA #BusinessPodcast

18

The wait is (not yet) over… The Government of British Columbia has published the Restricted Insurance Agent Licence Regulation, introducing a new restricted licensing framework for businesses that sell insurance incidentally to their primary goods or services. Certain non-insurance businesses previously exempt from licensure must now apply for a Restricted Insurance Agency Licence to continue selling eligible insurance products.to sell insurance products. The new regime will take effect January 1, 2027. https://blg.smh.re/Du3

13

1 Comment

Canada’s Supreme Court clarifies what “guaranteed” really means in property insurance. In Emond v. Trillium Mutual Insurance Co., the Court ruled 7–2 that compliance cost exclusions apply even with a Guaranteed Rebuilding Cost endorsement. While insurers see a win, dissenting justices warned unclear policy language could render coverage “illusory” for older homes. See why clarity in drafting GRC endorsements is critical for insurers. https://hubs.la/Q041hFy10 #insurance #Canada #legalinsights #propertyrisk

27

1 Comment

I came across an interesting article on Mondaq this morning. The Canadian case discussed in it highlights the importance of certainty in insurance policies. There is a plethora of cases dealing with ambiguous policy clauses and their effects. The principles of fairness—particularly the Treating Customers Fairly framework—also complicate policy interpretation. When insurers conduct their policy reviews, it is necessary to have a trained eye around TCF framework so as to align the terms accordingly. https://lnkd.in/dKaRkVJ6 #Insurance #InsurancePolicies #PolicyInterpretation

15

DLA Piper Canada's insurance group is pleased to announce the launch of Fortuity, a regular publication covering the latest news and trends in the Canadian #insurance industry. In this series, our team of experienced insurance lawyers will provide insight into regulatory updates, legislative shifts, and industry highlights to help you anticipate changes and make informed decisions. To receive the first edition of the series, we invite you to subscribe to our Canadian #insurancelaw list: https://lnkd.in/e9UH6CgX

20

"The Canadian insurance industry needs to get better at picking responsible distributors, managing conflicts of interests and training agents on product knowledge to ensure they follow the fair treatment of customers guidance, the Canadian Council of Insurance Regulators (CCIR) said in a report. " No regulator or anyone in the insurance industry can be surprised by the findings. We see these problems in every file (at least every file that I can remember). When will enforcement and sanctions occur, given that the industry has had years of notice, and as moral suasion still has failed? In the end, are the failures all about money (profits) and a lack of care about the protection of the insureds? What do you think? Maybe there are other reasons that a consumer's advocate (like me) is missing. "Even where processes were formal, insurers frequently lacked detail or left out fair treatment of customers-related criteria." "“As a result, those insurers were unable to obtain reasonable assurance that their expectations for addressing conflicts of interest were being adequately met and that [fair treatment of customers] was thereby being ensured,” the report said." "Insurers that prohibited distributors from making their own training materials did not always enforce this stipulation, even though it was written into contracts, the CCIR found. Plus, several insurers didn’t make training on the fair treatment of customers available to distributors. When distributors were allowed to develop their own training materials, insurers didn’t always define what the training needed to cover. Hence, regulators weren’t satisfied that salespeople had the right knowledge for the fair treatment of customers." See: https://lnkd.in/eMcVRCQR and see: https://lnkd.in/eq6daHyC #CCIR Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Ontario (FSRA) #insurance #lifeinsurance #agents #lifeagent #consumerprotection #compliance #MGA #ManagingGeneralAgency #time4change

19

4 Comments

How are Canadian courts interpreting Critical Illness (CI) insurance policy wording today? In our latest Litigation Matters series, we analyzed 22 court decisions across Canada to understand emerging judicial trends and how policy wording and claims practices are being interpreted. If you work in CI product design, underwriting, claims or legal, this is a must-read. Read the full report: https://ow.ly/QI0050XqHhz #MunichReLifeNA #CriticalIllness #ClaimsManagement #RiskManagement #InsuranceLaw

21

Master Policies can mislead The case Van Huizen v. Trisura Guarantee Insurance Co., [2020] by the, Ontario Court of Appeal, highlighted this. The insurer issued a professional liability policy (a “Master Policy”) to the Appraisal Institute of Canada(“AIC”). Coverage under the master policy was open to individual members of the AIC by way of individual application. On assessment of the individual member's risk, acceptance of the individual's application, and payment of the premium, an individual certificate of insurance is issued to that member. Mr. Van Huizen was a member of the AIC and was insured under the master policy and an individual certificate of insurance. Mr. Barkley was also a member of AIC. He was also insured under the master policy and his own individual certificate of insurance. In 2008 under the auspices of Hastings Appraisal Services, Mr. Barkley appraised a residential property. Three claims arose from this action, where Van Huizen was also involved. Mr. Van Huizen made a claim under the his own insurance contract in relation to the above proceedings, but the insurer denied coverage as the Van Huizen insurance contract did not provide coverage for the alleged professional negligence of Mr. Barkley. The court clarified the distinction between an insurance policy and an insurance contract. By itself, a policy is "merely a recitation of terms and conditions which do not attach to a particular person, item or interest". Without a contractual relationship incorporating its terms, the words of a policy" are worth less than the paper on which they are printed" An insurance contract, by contrast, creates contractual obligations between parties... In determining whether to enter into a particular insurance contract, the insurer assesses the risk and determines an acceptable premium based on the representations made by the applicant for insurance. When an insurer uses a standard policy, it may issue a certificate of insurance as proof of the contract on the terms set out in the policy. But an insurance policy or certificate of insurance is only the instrument; it evidences the existence of the insurance contract by which the parties have agreed to be bound. In this case the court stated that the master policy does not, however, constitute such a binding agreement on its own. It cannot. The master policy merely sets out the terms of professional liability insurance being offered to the members of the AIC. It is missing key terms on which agreement is necessary to form an insurance contract, including the assessed risk, the premium to be paid and the term of insurance. Each member who desires coverage must apply for the coverage on terms set out in the master policy. It follows that while each member who holds a certificate will be bound by identical terms asset out in the master policy, they are also bound by the unique terms as set out in their certificates and are therefore necessarily party to separate contracts with the insurer.

19

2 Comments

“Standard” doesn’t mean right. Take the YC SAFE. It’s everywhere. Standard? Sure. But are you sure it’s right for you? Why? Because YC said so? (Hint: Even the Canadian version skips over some local issues, like 45-106 forms and other securities law requirements.) Templates are a starting point, not a strategy. And “standard” should never be a shortcut for smart. Whether it’s a SAFE or a share purchase agreement, you need to ask: is this right for my company, my cap table, and my jurisdiction? #StartupLaw #VCLawyer #EarlyStage #DealTerms #TomorrowStartsHere

32

The CIP Society's study titled: "Political Risk: Implications for the Insurance Industry in Canada" is readily available for download. This contemporary research is part of our Emerging Issues series, and is an outcome of our CIP Society’s mandate to provide insightful and actionable research to Canada’s p&c industry. Download it here: https://bit.ly/4c5rKgq?

17

*Puts Compliance Hat On* 🔍 Compliance Reminder for Insurance Advisors & Firms Today’s enforcement action by Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Ontario (FSRA) — a combined $283,500 in penalties against an advisor and their firm — is a stark reminder of the non-negotiables in our industry. 📌 Key takeaways for all agents and firms: 1. Never use undue influence to secure business. Ethical conduct is foundational. There's a difference between driving to the net in sales and coercion. Document your conversations. 2. Always maintain active E&O insurance or a suitable financial guarantee. It’s not just a best practice — it’s a regulatory requirement. 3. Be truthful and transparent in all communications with regulators. Misleading information can lead to serious consequences. Also, REPLY to their communications in a timely manner. 4. Stay audit-ready. Regulators are increasingly focused on oversight and enforcement. Evidence of on-going service and notes in a client file are so helpful. 🛡️ These rules exist to protect consumers and uphold trust in our profession. Let’s continue to lead with integrity and accountability. 📖 Read the full story here: https://lnkd.in/e8vbD8x3? #InsuranceCompliance #EthicalAdvising #FSRA #InsuranceLeadership #ConsumerTrust #EandO #RegulatoryUpdate

16

2 Comments

In my experience, most business relationships show cracks within 12 to 24 months. That's when you realize the other person isn't the right fit. That they're—let's be honest—not a Monet. And yet, most entrepreneurs wait until after that point to think about shareholder agreements. The idea that two people stay perfectly in sync is BS. Think of it like those railroad tracks that are supposed to stay the exact same distance apart through a marriage. It's a nice theory. It's also completely unrealistic. You grow. You change. Risk tolerance shifts. It happens all the time. Your shareholder agreement isn't just a legal document. It's your exit strategy for when (not if) things change. The worst part of any business? Getting out. Nobody talks about it, but that's where the real pain lives. That's why these agreements are so important. They need to account for your business, your partnership dynamics, and how things will actually play out when the relationship gets tested. At Outsiders Law, we make sure you're covered before you need to be. #ShareholderAgreements #BusinessLaw #Lawyerpreneur #OutsidersLaw #Calgary

34

6 Comments