Case information

Insurance – Disability insurance – Group long term disability benefits – Coverage – Contracts – Standard form contracts – Interpretation – Whether a former employee is entitled to claim for benefits after employment and the associated group insurance coverage have ended – Whether the test for raising a new issue on appeal applies where the trial was adjudicated using a summary procedure – Whether relief from forfeiture applies to a claim that was made after coverage ended – Whether the limitation period discoverability principles apply to a claim for benefits after employment and coverage have ended.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Mr. MacIvor sustained a serious back injury and brain injury during a work-sponsored trip in 2005 while covered under his employer Pitney Bowes’ group benefit policy with Manufacturers Life Insurance Company (“Manulife”). He was not aware of the permanent and disabling nature of his brain injury until after he resigned from his employment with Pitney Bowes in 2008. He then went to work for Samsung but continued to experience difficulties. Mr. MacIvor attempted to make a long term disability (“LTD”) claim through Samsung but was advised that he would have to make his claim through Pitney Bowes’ insurer, Manulife, as he was employed there when his injuries occurred. Mr. MacIvor’s claim was denied by Manulife in 2010. In 2011, he began an action at the Ontario Superior Court of Justice where he sought a declaration of entitlement to LTD benefits through Manulife. At the Ontario Superior Court, Pollak J. held that Mr. MacIvor was not qualified for benefits because at the time he made his claim he was not covered under the Manulife policy. The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and set aside Pollak J.’s decision. It held that Mr. MacIvor was still entitled to coverage under the Manulife policy. In addition, the court granted relief from forfeiture to correct the untimely proof of claim and found that the claim was made within the proper limitation period.