In Walton V

In Walton v. General Accident Insurance Co. of Canada, the home the Waltons lived in was destroyed by fire. The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal found that the Waltons had no legal or equitable right to the property. What was the result?

A) The Waltons had no insurable interest in the home, and therefore had no right to payment from the insurance company.
B) The Waltons had subrogated their interest, and therefore had no right to payment from the insurance company.
C) The Waltons had no contra proferentum, and therefore had no right to payment from the insurance company.
D) The Waltons had exercised their right of salvage, and therefore were entitled to payment from the insurance company.
E) The Waltons had co-insured the property, and therefore were entitled to payment from the insurance company.