The most widely read magazine for Canadian lawyers
Issue link: https://digital.canadianlawyermag.com/i/50827
B.C. CASE PUTS FOCUS ON LAW FIRM INSURANCE COVERAGE a brain-injured Vancouver lawyer $5.9 million in damages after an associate knocked her down on a nightclub dance floor in 2001, says the law firm's insurer is not liable to pay the award. It has also provided greater insight into where the liability of law firms lies at company and non-company functions. Reasons for the second-portion T judgment are outlined in Danicek v. Alexander Holburn Beaudin & Lang. The first part of the judgment deliv- ered last fall dealt with the $5.9-million damage award to Michelle Danicek, the aspiring young Alexander Holburn Beaudin & Lang LLP lawyer injured by associate Jeremy Poole, now a partner at the firm. Danicek's subsequent brain trauma precluded her from working as a lawyer, although she did return to work shortly, but a car accident in 2002 aggravated the trauma. As outlined in the first portion of the hearing, Danicek signed a Mary Carter agreement with Poole where he admitted liability and agreed to pay just over $1 million from Co-opera- tors General Insurance Co., his gen- eral insurer. Co-operators agreed to a "loan and recovery" agreement to fund Poole's agreement with Danicek. In return, Poole agreed to pursue a claim against Lombard General Insurance Co. of Canada, the law firm's insurer, although Lombard was not willing to admit liability. The Lombard-recovered funds would be divided among Danicek and other parties. "Danicek agreed that once the Lombard coverage claim was concluded and any amounts were paid out, Danicek would release Poole. She would not seek to execute on any judg- ment against him," the reasons state. According to the reasons for judg- ment, the repayment of the loan amount would come only from the proceeds of the Lombard coverage claim; the loan he second portion of a Supreme Court of British Columbia judg- ment, which originally awarded would be forgiven if there was no recov- ery against Lombard. Phase two of the trial dealt with whether Danicek and Poole were cov- ered in the Lombard policy and wheth- er coverage extended beyond the dinner function sponsored by Alexander Hol- burn before a group of lawyers went to a clubs or house parties that associates went to afterwards. Justice Stephen F. Kelleher found that both Danicek and Poole were covered under the Lombard policy as employ- ees, however, he could not agree that the nightclub activity came within the "scope" of their employment. "He and "If this incident would have happened to a partner, I think there might have been a different outcome." NIGEL KENT nightclub. Testimony stated that groups of lawyers often went to house parties or nightclubs following these dinners and submitted their taxi chits and some other drink tabs, which the firm paid. An early review by a WorkSafeBC tribunal had denied a claim stating that although the lawyers had been among those attending the firm-sponsored associates dinner at the restaurant, the firm's role did not extend to the night- Ms. Danicek both attended a dinner paid for by their employer. There were some business reasons for Alexander Holburn to sponsor such events. . . . The attendance at Bar None, however, has a far more tenuous connection with employment. Some of the persons who attended the dinner decided to go to the bar; some did not. Additionally, it can- not be said that the law firm sponsored LSBC seeking more openness with public T he Law Society of British Columbia made strides in 2010 towards its goal of more openness in the eyes of the public, says retiring president Glen Ridgway, who stepped down to make way for incoming president Gavin Hume. "We made a number of steps forward in terms of alterations and enhancements to the discipline process," says Ridgway, adding that organizations such as the police and self-reg- ulatory bodies are coming under more public scrutiny in how they regulate, inquire into, and discipline matters relating to members. "We are moving towards opening up the membership on the disciplinary committee and more public involvement." Ridgway says there is a move to involve "other lawyers" as well as regular benchers on the discipline panel and members of the public. "We are just finalizing that now." During the year, he says the executive of the LSBC has attempted to deal with many of the public and internal concerns facing the legal system. "We took a number of steps to retain aboriginal lawyers," he says. In addition, the LSBC is looking at increasing the role that arti- cling and paralegal students can play in the justice system while regulated appropriately and under the supervision of a lawyer. www.CANADIAN Lawyermag.com M A RCH 2011 11 — JS C ontinued on pa g e 12