Canada: Case Summary: Temple Insurance Company V. Sazwan

Last Updated: July 17 2018
Article by Field LLP


Where the conduct of the insureds was in issue in the underlying actions and with respect to coverage under the policy, policy limits covered only 5% of a multimillion dollar claim and an acrimonious relationship existed between the insureds and the insurer, the Court directed that the insureds had the right to control the defence, with counsel of their choice, funded by the insurers.

Temple Insurance Company v. Sazwan, 2018 ABQB 156, per Belzil, J. [4275]


The insureds Sazwans were being sued in two actions for which they claim insurance coverage. They were sued by Tiger Calcium Services Inc. with respect to the sale of shares in a company the Sazwans owned 100% of the share in (Smokey Creek Ranch Ltd.), which was also a named defendant. It was alleged that the insured has misrepresented material facts engaged in fraud. They are alleged "to have intentionally breached agreements, conducting themselves dishonestly and fraudulently, conspired to interfere with contractual relations and acted deceitfully" (paragraph 34).  

The insured reported the Underlying Action to their insurance broker in February 2017. By that point in time, approximately $500,000 had been incurred in legal fees and disbursements for the defence of the Sazwans and Smoky Creek. The second action (the Warranty Action) was commenced against the insureds and Smoky Creek in July 2017, with respect to the same matters.  

The insureds had coverage from the Respondent insurers which provided for 10 million dollars in limits, with a sub limit of two million dollars for defence costs.  

The insurers issued a Reservation of Rights letter, and an Amended Reservation of Rights letter, indicating that the policy did not provide coverage for Smoky Creek (other than for defence costs) and that there was coverage available for some, but not all, of the claims in the Underlying and Warranty Actions. The amount of the claims was in excess of 136 million dollars, which was approximately 5% of the amount claimed in the Underlying and Warranty Actions.  

The insurers brought an Originating Application seeking a declaration that the right and duty to defend the insureds in the Underlying and Warranty Actions rested with the insurers, that the insureds must relinquish their defence of same, and that the insurers would not be responsible for legal expenses incurred by the insureds to that date. The insureds brought a Cross Application seeking a declaration that they be entitled to take over the control of the defence of the Actions with counsel of their choosing at the insurer's expense, arguing that there was a conflict of interest between the insureds and the insurers.  

At some point, the insurers proposed a compromise whereby both the insureds and the insurers would agree on independent counsel to be jointly instructed by both sides. This was rejected by the insureds. The insureds made a counterproposal that the act should be defended by way of co-counsel with the insureds counsel and the insurer's counsel participating. This was rejected by the insurance.  

The insureds filed an Affidavit indicating that they did not feel that they would be best served by the insurers controlling the defence "after such an acrimonious start to [their] working relationship"  

By agreement, this decision dealt only with the issue of who should control the defence, with both sides reserving the right to present further argument on the issue of responsibility for defence costs to date and on payment of defence costs.  

HELD:  For the Insureds; Declaration issued that the insureds were entitled to control the defence through their choice of counsel at the insurers' expense.

Court held that in some circumstances where there is a conflict of interest between the insurer and the insured, the court may rewrite the policy to permit the insured to assume responsibility for the defence at the expense of the insurer.

  1. The Court held as follows:

    [26]    In the jurisprudence, it is recognized that in circumstances, wherein there is a divergence of interests between the insurer and the insured, the court may in effect rewrite the terms of the policy to permit the insured to assume responsibility for the defence of the action, at the expense of the insurer.

    [27]    In Reeb v The Guarantee Company of North America, 2017 ONCA 771 (CanLII), the following appears at para 13: 

    13    When a lawyer is retained by an insurance company to represent its insured, a conflict of interest may arise where the interests of the insurance company and the insured are not in alignment. In her text, Understanding Lawyers' Ethics in Canada, 2d ed. (Markham: LexisNexis Canada Inc., 2016), at para. 6.87, p. 272, Alice Woolley concisely frames the conflict of interest question in the context of the tension between the insurance company's contractual rights and the insured's interests to full and fair representation, as follows:

    While courts have generally been deferential to the contractual rights of insurance companies in this respect, courts have also held that a lawyer "owes a duty to fully represent and protect the interest of the insured" and have required that the insured has obtained independent counsel where there is "a reasonable apprehension of conflict of interest on the part of counsel appointed by the insurer".

  2. The Court held that in such issues, the Court is to "strike a balance between a legitimate interest in both the insured and the insurer": PCL Constructors Canada v. Lumbermans Casualty Company, 2009 CanLII 32915 (ONSC); Zurich of Canada v. Renaud & Jacob, 1996 CanLII 5801 (QCCA); Brockton (Municipality) v. Frank Cowan Co., 2002 CanLII 7392 (ONCA) (at paragraphs 28 – 3). 
  3. The Court held that finding an apprehension of a conflict of interest between the insurer and the insured "does not equate to impugning the integrity of counsel chosen by the insurer" because the test has to do with "a reasonable apprehension of a conflict of interest" and not an actual conflict: Hoang v. Vincentini, 2015 ONCA 780 (paragraph 31). 
  4. The Court emphasized that the mere fact that an insurer issues a Reservation of Rights letter is insufficient, in and of itself, to support the necessary conflict of interest between an insurer and the insured so as to require the insurer to pay for the insured to control the defence at the insurer's expense:

    [30]    This reasoning was adopted by the Ontario Court of Appeal in Brockton (Municipality) v Frank Cowan Co, 2002 CanLII 7392 (ON CA), 2002 OJ No 20, wherein the following passages appear at paras 41-43:

    [41]    LeBel J.A. [in Zurich] concluded that the potential tension which inheres in the relationship between the insurer and the insured and which is manifested by the reservation of rights by the insurer is not per se sufficient to require the insurer to surrender control of the defence. It would too quickly cost the insurer the right it contracted for. Rather, the focus must be on the mandate given by the insurer to the counsel it appoints to conduct the defence. Do the circumstances of the particular case create a reasonable apprehension of conflict of interest if that counsel were to act for both the insurer and the insured in defending the action? If the insurer puts counsel in a position of having conflicting mandates it must surrender control of the defence to an insured who wishes to retain its own counsel paid for by the insurer.

    [42]    In coming to this conclusion, LeBel J.A. noted that American jurisprudence had moved towards a similar position and away from the broader basis for shifting control of the defence to the insured that was articulated in Cumis. For example, after Cumis, in Foremost Insurance Co. v. Wilks, 253 Cal. Rptr. 596, (1988), the California Court of Appeal made clear that not every case where the insurer elects to defend the insured under a reservation of rights creates a conflict of interest requiring the insurer to furnish independent counsel. If the reservation of rights arises because of coverage questions which depend upon an aspect of the insured's own conduct that is in issue in the underlying litigation, a conflict exists. On the other hand, where the reservation of rights is based on coverage disputes which have nothing to do with the issues being litigated in the underlying action, there is no conflict of interest requiring independent counsel paid for by the insurer.

    [43]    I agree with the approach taken in Zurich and Foremost. The issue is the degree of divergence of interest that must exist before the insurer can be required to surrender control of the defence and pay for counsel retained by the insured. The balance is between the insured's right to a full and fair defence of the civil action against it and the insurer's right to control that defence because of its potential ultimate obligation to indemnify. In my view, that balance is appropriately struck by requiring that there be, in the circumstances of the particular case, a reasonable apprehension of conflict of interest on the part of counsel appointed by the insurer before the insured is entitled to independent counsel at the insurer's expense. The question is whether counsel's mandate from the insurer can reasonably be said to conflict with his mandate to defend the insured in the civil action. Until that point is reached, the insured's right to a defence and the insurer's right to control that defence can satisfactorily co-exist.  

  5. The Court concluded by indicating that "the focus of the inquiry is whether the Insureds' own conduct is an issue in the actions being advanced against them" (paragraph 32).

The Court concluded that there was a reasonable apprehension of conflict of interest between insurers and insureds, so as to allow the insureds to control the defence through their own counsel at the expense of the insurers.

  1. The Court held that "[i]t is uncontroverted, that the conduct of the Sazwans is squarely an issue in both the Underlying and Warranty Actions" and was "at the core of many of the allegations":
  2. [46]    I have concluded that in the circumstances of the Underlying and Warranty actions, there is a reasonable apprehension of conflict of interest between the Insurers request to take over the defence and the request by the Sazwans to conduct their own defence at the expense of the Insurers.

    [47]    I have reached this conclusion for three reasons.

    [48]    Firstly, the conduct of the Sazwans is squarely in issue in the pleadings in both actions and thus squarely in issue in terms of what claims are entitled to indemnity under the policy and which are not.

    [49]    Secondly, the claims being advanced are grossly in excess of the policy limits, leaving the Sazwans exposed personally to enormous claims.

    [50]    Thirdly, on the evidentiary record before me, the relationship between the Insurers and the Sazwans is at best extremely strained and at worst, irretrievably broken. At this point there is no reasonable prospect that the Insurers and the Sazwans will ever trust each other. This is a formula for more conflict in the future which is not in the best interests of the Insurers, the Sazwans or the administration of justice.

    [51]    In reaching this conclusion, I am not blaming any individual or entity for the breakdown of the relationship. Rather, I am merely identifying the reality of the dispute before me which has developed since the commencement of the Underlying action on December 1, 2016.

    [52]    I have no hesitation in concluding that all parties involved, including insurance company personnel, the Sazwans and counsel have acted honestly and in good faith.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Events from this Firm
22 Jan 2019, Webinar, Calgary, Canada

Learn about the most important professional regulatory Court cases of the past year. What are the key legal trends?

23 Jan 2019, Seminar, Calgary, Canada

Field Law and IISA are excited to present an in-depth workshop on how the legalization of recreational cannabis is impacting and will impact the insurance industry.

6 Feb 2019, Other, Calgary, Canada

Join Field Law for a review of the most important legal cases from 2018.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions