Sexual harassment is included in a administrators and officers (D&O) insurance coverage coverage exclusion for ‘sexual misconduct,’ even when the phrases sexual harassment don’t seem within the definition, the Court docket of King’s Bench of New Brunswick discovered Monday.
AIG Insurance coverage is subsequently not obligated to pay for the authorized defence of Crandall College in a wrongful termination lawsuit introduced in opposition to the college by a former professor who was let go after an investigation into the alleged sexual harassment of a pupil.
The courtroom dismissed the college’s declare that AIG’s coverage exclusion for ‘sexual misconduct’ didn’t apply as a result of the the coverage’s definition of sexual misconduct didn’t embrace the phrases “sexual harassment.”
Within the college’s D&O coverage, issued by AIG, the exclusion for ‘sexual misconduct’ states:
“’Sexual Misconduct’ means any licentious, immoral or sexual conduct, sexual abuse, sexual assault, or molestation meant to result in or culminating in any sexual act in opposition to particular person(s).”
Because the courtroom famous, “sexual harassment just isn’t outlined within the EPL protection or within the sexual misconduct exclusion of the insurance coverage coverage.”
The courtroom went on to notice a 1989 Supreme Court docket of Canada case through which sexual harassment is outlined because the “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature that detrimentally impacts the work setting or results in adversarial job-related penalties for the victims of the harassment.”
With that, the New Brunswick court concluded: “The plain and unusual which means of sexual harassment is a type of sexual violence, a type of sexual behaviour.
“The definition of sexual misconduct within the sexual misconduct exclusion consists of ‘immoral and sexual behaviour’ and subsequently consists of sexual harassment.
“Crandall’s suggestion that sexual harassment ought to have been spelled out within the definition of sexual misconduct is misguided. The time period sexual behaviour is sufficiently broad to incorporate sexual harassment.”
The courtroom has not but thought-about the advantage of the professor’s wrongful termination lawsuit.
In different information: Intact’s appetite in Alberta auto reducing, CEO says
Background
Crandall College launched an inner investigation after posts on a social media account titled @DoBetterCrandall, made nameless allegations of harassment by the hands of Crandall staff, the courtroom determination states.
The Michaud Report documented the findings of the inner investigation. “In reviewing over 100 pages of correspondence between [a professor] and a pupil over a seven-month interval, and interviewing the events, the investigator concluded this was a traditional case of grooming and constituted sexual harassment,” because the courtroom summarized a part of the report’s findings.
The investigation led to Crandall terminating considered one of its staff for sexual harassment of a pupil.
The professor and his associate filed a civil declare in opposition to the college for wrongful termination, defamation, false mild in public eye, intrusion upon seclusion, public disclosure and breach of confidence.
Crandall College sought protection for its authorized prices from AIG’s D&O coverage. It claimed the exclusion for sexual misconduct didn’t apply as a result of it was a wrongful termination swimsuit.
AIG stated the termination swimsuit was not directly a results of sexual harassment, which the coverage excluded.
The courtroom discovered sexual harassment was certainly included within the coverage’s definition of sexual misconduct and was subsequently excluded from coverage protection.
Characteristic photograph courtesy of iStock.com/Hailshadow
