Another wronged investor has won a case against Clarica Life Insurance Co., in which the B.C. Supreme Court held the firm vicariously liable for the conduct of an agent that was an independent contractor.

The court ruled that Mutual Life Assurance of Canada, now known as Clarica, is liable for the plaintiff’s $260,000 loss. It found Mutual Life vicariously liable for the actions of the agent even though he is an independent contractor.

The plaintiff in this case was Nanna Wilson, a 57-year old widow with a high school education, one year of college and a four-year apprenticeship as a hairdresser. She has limited knowledge of business and financial matters. She was also caught up in a case where a Mutual Life agent, Carey Dennis, misappropriated annuity investments for himself.

Earlier this year, Clarica lost another case involving the same agent under similar circumstances. And the judge in this case followed that decision, noting, “The Thiessen case is not distinguishable from the present case on the issue of whether Mr. Dennis was an employee or an independent contractor. I find the reasons of Madam Justice Ross in the Thiessen decision persuasive and I follow them. I would find that Mr. Dennis was an independent contractor, not an employee of Mutual Life.” The judge also found the firm liable despite the independent contractor status.

Mutual Life was also deemed liable as a result of its negligence in hiring Dennis because the firm had interviewed a previous employer, who indicated that it had problems with money missing and it suspected Dennis. Yet he was hired as a life agent anyway.