Insurer Ordered to Defend and Pay for Independent Lawyer

The Plaintiff sued the Defendant for injuries arising from an alleged assault. The Defendant had homeowner's insurance, but an assault would be considered an "intentional act" - which is not covered by the insurance policy. However, the Court agreed that the insurer had to defend because the Defendant was claiming a defence of "self-defence" - which is not considered an "intentional act" for the purposes of determining whether the insurer must defend. As well, given that there was a conflict between the insurer and the Defendant regarding coverage, which depended upon an aspect of the Defendant's own conduct, he was entitled to an independent lawyer at the insurer's expense. For a free consultation regarding your personal injury or insurance case, call Todd K. Plant at 613-563-1131, Plant Quinn Thiele LLP, Ottawa Personal Injury Lawyers, www.pqtlaw.com