3. Schoff as Royal Iwuresce Company of Casada, 2004 ABCA 180 (CanLIT Charles Goyan, an underage driver, was driing hs 1986 Msibu when the caused an accident injuring the driver and passenger in another car (the Schotfsi. They successfully sued him, obtaining a judgment totalling almost $500000. They then sought to collect this amount trom the insurance company that had insured the Malbu. The nsurance company refused to pay, clsiming that it wss not bound hy the policy contract because of misrepresentations made when the policy wss made. Gayan had transterred awnership aft the vehiole to his mother at the time the policy was taken out, and on the application she caimed that she was the only licensed driver in her household and she woud be the oniy person driving the Malibu. She also clsimed that there had been no accidents in relation to any vahicle she owned in the past six years and that she owted three vehicles at the time ol the policy, In fact, of her four sons iving with her, three had valid driver's licences and the fourth had his suspended Also, the three with licences were under the age of 25. She owned five vehicles, not the three claimed, and her accident record had also beon ncorrectly stated. Obviously, her son Charles was driving the Mallbu Do you think that the insurance company should be required to pay the Schoffs? Would it affect your answer to know that the insurance company had learned that the statement she geve about heving no accidents in the last six years was incorrect before it issued the policy, and it wes issued anyway