Silberg v. California Life Insurance

I dissent. The exclusionary clause in question is clear and unambiguous and controls the interpretation of the policy. There being no ambiguity in the terms of the exclusionary clause, its provisions must be effectuated. (Canadian Indem. Co. v. West. Nat. Ins. Co. (1955) 134 Cal.App.2d 512, 516-517 [286 P.2d 532].)

The exclusionary clause provides: “This policy does not cover any loss caused by or resulting from (1) injury or sickness for which compensation is payable under any Workmen’s Compensation or Occupational Disease Law. . . .’’ The only reasonable interpretation of this language is…