Law360 Canada ( August 31, 2018, 7:57 AM EDT) -- Appeal by the insurer from summary judgment dismissing its action for repayment of excessive benefits paid to its insured. The respondent’s dental practice was destroyed by fire. At the time of the loss, the appellant had issued an insurance policy for the building and its contents. This policy also included coverage for business interruption. The appellant made a series of payments to the respondents prior to the determination of the total loss, including a $750,000 advance payment for the loss payable for the building. In an email to the respondent, the appellant advised that by accepting the $750,000 payment, the respondent did not tie himself to anything and could use any excess as he saw fit. A subsequent appraisal found the total amount payable by the appellant was $926,677. By that time the appellant had already paid out $1,030,187. It sued to recover the overpayment. The motion judge held that the $750,000 paid by the appellant was not in fact an advance because it was paid on the basis that it could be used as the respondents saw fit. The motion judge found that the payment was deliberate and not the product of mistake. The motion judge found that there was no unjust enrichment. He determined that the respondent received no benefit when he received the $750,000 payment and that the juristic reason for the payment was the appellant’s email which he said permitted the respondent to do whatever he wanted with the money....