The respondent issued a policy of auto insurance to the applicant parents. Upon renewal of the policy, the applicant parents failed to disclose to the respondent that the applicant son was a licensed driver in their household. As of the date of the renewal, he held a G2 license. He previously held a G1 license. The applicant son was involved in a motor vehicle accident and the respondent took the position that the policy was void for the applicants’ failure to disclose a material change in risk. The applicants sought a declaration that the policy was valid, and in the alternative for relief from forfeiture from any breach of the policy on their part. The court accepted that this change was material to the respondent, who would have increased the premium almost two-fold based on a high-risk teenage male driver with a G2 license living in the household. As a result, Justice Glustein accepted that the policy was void for the applicant’s breach of statutory conditions. Justice Glustein further held that relief for forfeiture was not available to the applicants because their failure to disclose a material risk was not imperfect compliance with a policy term, rather it was non-compliance with a condition precedent.
