What is the test for s. 103(1) of the Insurance Code of Canada?

The plaintiff also cites the case of McCauley v. Royal Insurance Company of Canada, [1980] O.J. No. 336. There, the court concluded at para. 60: ¶60 I conclude from the above jurisprudence and doctrine that s. 103 may be interpreted to relieve a party from forfeiture caused by non-compliance or imperfect compliance. This is particularly true where, as in the case at bar, the insurer has repudiated liability under the policy of insurance. Moreover, apart from resorting to this interpretation of s. 103 to grant the relief required, there appears to be ample judicial discretionary authority to find that by denying liability a non-prejudiced defendant has waived its right to rely on the, breach of the statutory condition, and is, therefore, estopped from affirming the non-compliance as to proof of loss as a defence.