The conflicting views of the majority and dissent in Hare v. Hare do not assist us here as it is common ground that the earliest time the limitation period can start to run is the date the first party insurer demands indemnification from the second party insurer. I would point out, however, that although [page662] we are not dealing with a "demand obligation" within the meaning of s. 5(3), we are dealing with an obligation that is triggered by a demand and that the interpretation I suggest is consistent with that imposed by the legislature for demand obligations. Disposition
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.