caser – -Translation – Keybot Dictionary

Spacer TTN Translation Network TTN TTN Login Deutsch Français Spacer Help
Source Languages Target Languages
Keybot 2 Results  scc.lexum.org
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
6 Caser la police multirisque en cause dans la catégorie visée par la partie 5 de la Loi, qui régit l’assurance incendie, n’est possible qu’au prix d’une interprétation forcée et de résultats incongrus.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain
6 The comprehensive policy at issue on this appeal cannot be shoehorned into the Part 5 fire insurance section without contrived reconstruction and anomalous consequences.  It simply does not fit.  Consequently, it cannot be said that the Legislature intended the Fire Insurance provisions to govern.  It follows that comprehensive policies are governed by Part 2, which is of general application.  Accordingly, we conclude that the limitation period of one year from filing proof of loss applies, and that the appellant’s claim is not statute-barred.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL
119 de la partie 5, ni l’historique de cette disposition n’appuient la conclusion que le législateur voulait qu’une police multirisque  relève de la partie 5. Caser ces polices dans cette partie n’est possible qu’au prix d’une interprétation forcée et de résultats incongrus.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain
Neither the language of s. 119 in Part 5 nor the history of that provision supported the conclusion that the Legislature intended a multi‑risk policy to fall within Part 5.  Such policies cannot be shoehorned into that Part without contrived reconstruction and anomalous consequences. Section 119, despite its alterations, is based on the outmoded paradigm of discrete categories of insurance policies and is incapable of coherently addressing the modern multi‑peril policy.  Since the insured’s policy does not fit into a specific category, it is governed by Part 2.  Part 2, however, does not represent an ideal solution for multi‑risk comprehensive policies and it would be highly salutary for the Legislature to amend the Act and to provide specifically for such policies. The fact that the contract of insurance specifies a limitation period of one year from loss did not oust the longer limitation period in Part 2 because s. 3(a) of the Act does not permit the insurer to substitute contractually harsher terms than those provided in Part 2.