and replace its own faulty work of deficient product. They are intended to
indemnify the insured in a situation where the deficient product causes
damages to a third party’s property.
 There are good policy reasons for restricting the application of CGL policies in this way. Having insurance cover the
costs of the insured’s own product, effectively allows the insured
to be paid twice: once by the insured’s customer and a second
time by the insurer. It effectively rewards the insured for producing defective product by allowing the insured to make two
sales instead of one. In addition, having the insurer act as a
guarantor of the insured’s product relieves the insured of any
incentive to perform its job properly or take measures to ensure
that what it sells is of merchantable quality: Privest Properties
Ltd. v. Foundation Co. of Canada Ltd.,  B.C.J. No. 2213,
1991 CanLII 2346 (S.C.), at pp. 79-80.
 I begin my analysis with the Peller claim, the critical paragraphs of which state:
4. On or about September 15, 2011 Andrew Peller entered into a con-tractwith Mori, pursuant to which Mori agreed to provide 43,205 grapevines
of various varieties . . . (Paragraphs 5 and 6 of the claim contain similar
allegations with respect to additional contracts between Mori and Peller).
. . . . .
7. It was an express, or alternatively, an implied term of the . . . [contracts]
that the vines supplied by Mori would be fit for their intended purpose,
of merchantable quality and would be free of all chemicals, funguses or diseases that could kill the vines or detrimentally impact their productivity.
8. At all material times, Mori owed a duty of care to Andrew Peller to ensure
that the vines provided to Andrew Peller were fit for their intended purpose,
of merchantable quality, and were free of all chemicals, funguses or diseases
that could kill the vines or detrimentally impact their productivity.
. . . . .
10. On or about August 10, 2012 Mori advised Andrew Peller that the vines
supplied pursuant to the Contracts were defective as a result of the use of
certain chemicals during the growing process. Andrew Peller reviewed the
progress of the vines, and found that approximately 40% of the vines it had
purchased from Mori were dead.
11. As a result, Andrew Peller immediately purchased vines to replace the
approximately 40% of the vines that were dead . . .
12. In or about January 2013, Andrew Peller learned that, contrary to what
Mori had advised in August 2012, the vines it had purchased were infected
with four separate funguses, which would kill the remaining 60% of
the vines before they could reach productivity. As a result, Andrew Peller