Global Process Systems Inc and Another v Berhad: SC 1 Feb 2011

An oil rig (The Cendor MOPU) was being transported from Texas to Malaysia. During the voyage, three of the four legs suffered damage. The insurers refused liability saying that the damage was the result of inherent weaknesses in the rig.
Held: The insurer’s appeal succeeded. The proximate cause of the loss was not the inherent vice, but the insured peril. Under the 1906 Act the fact that the goods are not reasonably fit in all respects to encounter the ordinary perils of the seas of the adventure insured, does not automatically deprive the assured of cover. There is no equivalent to the provisions relating to time policies, where loss or damage attributable to unseaworthiness at the outset known to the assured is excluded.

Lord Mance, Lord Collins, Lord Clarke, Lord Dyson, Lord Saville
[2011] UKSC 5, UKSC 2010/0006, [2011] 1 All ER 869, [2011] 1 Lloyds Rep 560, [2011] Bus LR 537, 2011 AMC 305
Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC Summ, SC
Marine Insurance Act 1906 55(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
At first instanceGlobal Process Sytems Inc and Another v Syarikat Takaful Malaysia Berhad ComC 31-Mar-2009
The Cendor MOPU
The insurance company had refused a claim after the failure of an oil rig, saying that the loss of the rig legs during transit was the inevitable consequence of the voyage, and that since insurance was against risks, not certainties, they were under . .
Appeal fromGlobal Process Systems Inc and Another v Berhad CA 17-Dec-2009
An oil rig suffered major damage in transit in rough seas. The insurers repudiated liability saying that the damages was the result of a natural vice rather than perils at sea.
Held: The fact that the sea conditions were within the range of . .
CitedJ J Lloyd Instruments Ltd v Northern Star Insurance Co Ltd (The ‘Miss Jay Jay’) CA 1987
The owner claimed for damage to the hull of the Jay Jay.
Held: Where there are two operative causes, one covered by the policy risks and one not, then provided that the second cause is not an excluded peril, the Assured can recover. There was . .
CitedWayne Tank and Pump Company Ltd v Employers Liability Assurance Corporation Ltd CA 1973
The court discussed the effect of an exception clause in an insurance policy: ‘The effect of an exception is to save the insurer from liability for a loss which but for the exception would be covered. The effect of the cover is not to impose on the . .
CitedThomas Wilson Sons and Co v Owners of Cargo per the ‘Xantho’ HL 14-Jul-1887
A cause of damage otherwise satisfying the established definition may be a peril of the sea even though caused by a shipowner’s negligence. Lord Herschell said: ‘If that which immediately caused the loss was a peril of the sea, it matters not how it . .
CitedSoya GmbH Mainz Kommanditgesellschaft v White CA 1982
Where insured goods deteriorated during a passage, not because they had been subjected to some external fortuitous accident or casualty, but because of their natural behaviour in the ordinary course of the voyage, then such deterioration amounted to . .
CitedSoya GmbH Mainz Kommanditgesellschaft v White HL 1983
The cargo, soya beans, was insured against heating, sweating and spontaneous combustion risks. It arrived in a heated and deteriorated condition. The insurers denied liability saying that the proximate cause of the damage was inherent vice or nature . .
CitedT M Noten BV v Hardin 1989
Industrial leather gloves were shipped from Calcutta to Rotterdam. On arrival the good were found to be wet, stained, mouldy and discoloured.
Held: The damage had been caused by moisture, which had been absorbed by the goods in the humid . .
CitedT M Noten BV v Harding CA 1990
Bingham LJ wasasked as to what was meant by the proximate cause of an accident at sea, and said: ‘Unchallenged and unchallengeable authority shows that this is a question to be answered applying the common sense of a business or seafaring man.’ . .
OverruledMayban General Assurance Bhd, AMI Insurans Bhd, Malaysian International Insurance Bhd, Syarikat Takaful Malaysia Bhd v Alstom Power Plants Ltd, Alstom T and D Ltd QBD 11-May-2004
An electrical transformer was shipped from Ellesmere Port to Rotterdam and there transferred to a container vessel for carriage to Lumut. Severe weather was encountered, but not such as a commercial person would regard as falling outside the range . .
CitedE D Sassoon and Co v Western Assurance Co PC 1912
(Shanghai) A cargo of opium was damaged as a result of ingress of water through a rotten hull.
Held: Losses occasioned by the incursion of water into a vessel’s hull owing to the defective, deteriorated or decayed condition of the hull or . .
CitedCanada Rice Mills Ltd v Union Marine and General Insurance Co Ltd PC 1941
Cargo was on a voyage from Rangoon to British Columbia and insured against perils of the sea. It was damaged by reason of heating occasioned when cargo hold ventilators were closed to prevent ingress of water in heavy weather. The Court of Appeal of . .
CitedJ J Lloyd Instruments Ltd v Northern Star Insurance Co Ltd ‘The Miss Jay Jay’ 1985
Mustill J considered liability under a marine insurance where damage was suffered when the sea state was within what might reasonably be anticipated: ‘The cases make it quite plain that if the action of the wind or sea is the immediate cause of the . .
CitedSteel v State Line Steamship Co 1877
An insured ship should be ‘in a condition to encounter whatever perils of the sea a ship of that kind and laden in that way may be fairly expected to encounter.’ However, an express exception of negligence did not cover loss due to unseaworthiness. . .
CitedNelson Marketing International Inc v Royal and Sun Alliance Insurance Co. of Canada 28-Jun-2006
(British Columbia Court of Appeal) Shipments of laminated truck flooring were damaged by moisture absorbed by the flooring in the course of manufacture, which on the voyage had evaporated and condensed in circumstances which were not established to . .
CitedRobert Thompson, Joseph Lowes Thompson, And John Thompson v Thomas Duck Hopper 23-Feb-1856
There is not in general an implied warranty of seaworthiness in a time policy of assurance. . .
CitedNE Neter and Co Ltd v Licenses and General Insurance Co Ltd 1944
A cargo of casks and bags of china clay out-turned damaged, as a result of the stoving in of the casks on a voyage during which there had been heavy weather.
Held: The claim failed. The plaintiffs had not proved that the proximate cause of the . .
CitedMountain v Whittle HL 1921
The insured vessel, a houseboat, was towed alongside a tug some seven and half miles to Northam. Her topside seams were leaky and defective. The breast wave thrown up by the two vessels caused water to mount up against the seams and enter and sink . .
CitedLeyland Shipping Co Ltd v Norwich Union Fire Insurance Society Ltd HL 1918
The ship was insured against the perils of the sea by a policy containing a warranty against all consequences of hostilities. While voyaging to Le Havre, she was torpedoed by a German submarine 25 miles from port. She began to settle by the head, . .
CitedDudgeon v Pembroke 1877
If there are two concurrent causes of a loss, one falling within the policy, the other simply not covered by the terms of the policy, the insured may recover. . .
CitedThames and Mersey Marine Insurance Co Ltd v Hamilton, Fraser and Co 1887
Lord MacNaghten noted that: ‘In marine insurance it is above all things necessary to abide by settled rules and to avoid anything like novel refinements or a new departure’. . .

Cited by:
CitedNavigators Insurance Company Ltd and Others v Atlasnavios-Navegacao Lda SC 22-May-2018
The vessel had been taken by the authorities in Venezuela after drugs were found to have been attached to its hull by third parties. Six months later it was declared a constructive total loss. The ship owners now sought recovery of its value from . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 01 December 2021; Ref: scu.428360

Cosco Bulk Carrier Co Ltd and Another v M/V ‘Saldanha’ C/P Dated 25/06/08: ComC 11 Jun 2010

The court considered the effect of a ship being taken by pirates at sea on the obligations in the charterparty contract. The insurers said that a claim for ‘average accident’ must include an element of physical damage – absent in this case.
Held: The appeal failed. ‘Average accident’ need not include physical damage, but nor could seizure by pirates amount to an accident. As a matter of indelible impression seizure by pirates is a ‘classic example’ of a totally extraneous cause.

Gross J
[2010] EWHC 1340 (Comm), [2010] 1 CLC 919, [2011] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 187
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
See AlsoMasefield Ag v Amlin Corporate Member Ltd; The Bunga Melati Dua ComC 18-Feb-2010
. .
Not FollowedThe Mareva AS 1977
The wording ‘average accident’ in the policy: ‘merely means an accident which causes damage.’ . .
CitedKidston v Empire Insurance Co 1866
The court was asked whether shipowners could recover under a sue and labour clause in a freight policy for the costs of transhipment expended in order to avoid the loss of the freight. There had been no abandonment and underwriters argued that this . .
DistinguishedThe Laconian Confidence 1997
Charterers appealed against the decision of the arbitrator on the meaning of the phrase ‘any other cause’. The performance of the contract had been interrupted by the intervention of the authorities in Chittagong.
Held: The appeal failed. The . .
CitedThe Alfred Trigon 1981
The court considered the wording, in the context of a second-hand ship sale and purchase market, ‘average damage’.
Held: ‘Average’ here could not mean ‘damage’ simpliciter and was understandably construed to mean a particular kind of damage – . .
CitedKelman v Livanos 1955
. .
CitedChandris v Isbrandtsen-Moller Co Inc CA 1950
Although section 3(1) of the 1934 Act expressly empowered only courts of record to include interest in sums for which judgment was given for damages or debt, arbitrators were nevertheless empowered by the agreement of reference to apply English law, . .
CitedThomas Wilson Sons and Co v Owners of Cargo per the ‘Xantho’ HL 14-Jul-1887
A cause of damage otherwise satisfying the established definition may be a peril of the sea even though caused by a shipowner’s negligence. Lord Herschell said: ‘If that which immediately caused the loss was a peril of the sea, it matters not how it . .
CitedRoyal Greek Government v Minister of Transport CA 2-Jan-1949
The charterers had ordered the vessel to sail but her crew refused to do so, except in convoy, because of the war. A dispute arose as to whether, the charterers’ order to sail having been disobeyed, the vessel was off-hire.
Held: The appeal . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Contract, Insurance

Updated: 01 December 2021; Ref: scu.416635

Thomas Wilson Sons and Co v Owners of Cargo per the ‘Xantho’: HL 14 Jul 1887

A cause of damage otherwise satisfying the established definition may be a peril of the sea even though caused by a shipowner’s negligence. Lord Herschell said: ‘If that which immediately caused the loss was a peril of the sea, it matters not how it was induced, even if it were by the negligence of those navigating the vessel.’ A shipowner owes the bill of lading holder a bailee’s duty of care and accordingly, construing the bill of lading contract as a whole, the shipowner could not rely on the ‘perils of the sea’ exception to oust his duty of care.
the words in a cancellation clause to ‘perils or danger and accidents of the sea’ bear the same meaning, as a matter of construction, in a bill of lading or contract of carriage as in an insurance policy.
The words ‘perils of the sea’: ‘do not protect, for example, against that natural and inevitable action of the wind and waves, which results in what may be described as wear and tear. There must be some casualty, something which could not be foreseen as one of the necessary incidents of the adventure. The purpose of the policy is to secure an indemnity against accidents which may happen, not against events which must happen.’

Lord Herschell, Lord Bramwell
(1887) 12 App Cas 503, [1887] UKLawRpAC 28
Commonlii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedCosco Bulk Carrier Co Ltd and Another v M/V ‘Saldanha’ C/P Dated 25/06/08 ComC 11-Jun-2010
The court considered the effect of a ship being taken by pirates at sea on the obligations in the charterparty contract. The insurers said that a claim for ‘average accident’ must include an element of physical damage – absent in this case.
CitedGlobal Process Systems Inc and Another v Berhad SC 1-Feb-2011
An oil rig (The Cendor MOPU) was being transported from Texas to Malaysia. During the voyage, three of the four legs suffered damage. The insurers refused liability saying that the damage was the result of inherent weaknesses in the rig.
Held: . .
CitedVolcafe Ltd and Others v Compania Sud Americana De Vapores Sa SC 5-Dec-2018
The claimant appellants, arranged shipment of bagged Colombian green coffee beans, stowed in 20 unventilated 20-foot containers from Panama to Rotterdam, Hamburg or Bremerhaven for on carriage to Bremen. The bill of lading for each consignment . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Insurance

Updated: 01 December 2021; Ref: scu.416712

Albert v Motor Insurers Bureau: HL 1971

The plaintiff suffered injury as a passenger when getting a lift to work from a co-worker. The driver was uninsured and had given lift to several co-workers over a period of time, mking a charge.
Held: The lift arrangement was in the nature of a contract, and therefore under the MIB scheme, the MIB were obliged to pay compensation.
Viscount Dilhorne said: ‘To constitute carriage for hire or reward, it is not, of course, necessary that payment is made before the journey. If there is an arrangement that payment will be made for that it matters not when the payment is in fact made.’

Viscount Dilhorne
[1971] 3 WLR 291
England and Wales

Road Traffic, Insurance, Personal Injury, Contract

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.565344

Scher and Others v Policyholders Protection Board and Others Ackman v Same: HL 1 Sep 1993

The Court of Appeal had defined the expression ‘any liability . . under the terms of any policy’ in wide terms. An insurance policy is a UK one, if the obligations to be performed might have been part of a UK operation.
Lord Mustill criticised an attempt by the judge to construe a statute in a vacuum divorced from any proper factual basis.

Lord Mustill
Independent 16-Jul-1993, Times 16-Jul-1993, Gazette 01-Sep-1993, Gazette 19-Jan-1994, [1994] 2 AC 57
Policyholders Protection Act 1975 4(2), Insurance Companies Act 1982 96(1), Third Party (Rights Against Insurers) Act 1930
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedAitken v Financial Services Compensation Scheme Limited SCS 30-May-2003
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, International

Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.89046

Eurodale Manufacturing Ltd v Ecclesiastical Insurance Office Plc: CA 10 Feb 2003

Goods were insured whilst in transit. They were stored in a secure warehouse over a weekend pending delivery but were stolen. The insurance covered them ‘during the ordinary course of transit’.
Held: The goods were covered.

Lord Justice Ward,
Lord Justice Clarke,
And,
Lord Justice Longmore
[2003] EWCA Civ 203, Gazette 03-Apr-2003
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
AppliedCrows Transport Ltd v Phoenix Assurance Co Ltd 1965
The insured goods were stolen from temporary storage whilst awaiting being loading.
Held: They were ‘in transit’ under the insurance policy, everything done thereafter was incidental to and part of that transit. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 29 November 2021; Ref: scu.181298

Nemeti and Others v Sabre Insurance Co Ltd: CA 3 Dec 2013

The court considered the power of courts to allow substitution of a new party after the expiration of the limitation period.

Sir Terence Etherton Ch, Hallett VP, Sharp LJJ
[2013] EWCA Civ 1555
Bailii
European Communities (Rights against Insurers) Regulations 2002, Road Traffic Act 1988 151
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v Liverpool City Council Ex Parte Muldoon; Regina v Same Ex Parte Kelly HL 11-Jul-1996
The claimant sought to challenge a refusal of the Housing Authority to pay housing benefit. The Secretary of State had made the relevant Regulations determining eligibility for benefits. If the challenge were successful, the Secretary of State would . .
CitedIrwin and Another v Lynch and Another CA 6-Oct-2010
The court considered an appeal against an order allowing an amendment outside the limitation period which would . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Insurance, Road Traffic

Updated: 26 November 2021; Ref: scu.518566

The North of England P and I Association (Freedom To Provide Services – Direct Insurance Other Than Life Assurance): ECJ 15 Apr 2021

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Direct insurance other than life assurance – Second Directive 88/357/EEC – Second indent of Article 2(d) – Directive 92/49/EEC – First subparagraph of Article 46(2) – Taxation of insurance premiums – Concept of ‘Member State where the risk is situated’ – Vehicles of any type – Concept of ‘Member State of registration’ – Insurance of sea-going vessels – Ships entered in the shipping register maintained by one Member State but flying the flag of another Member State or of a third State under a temporary flagging-out authorisation

[2021] EUECJ C-786/19, ECLI:EU:C:2021:276
Bailii
England and Wales

Insurance

Updated: 26 November 2021; Ref: scu.670071

Hall Brothers Steamship Company Limited v Young: CA 1939

The shipowners appealed a decision that the underwriters were not liable under collision liability clause. Their ship had collided with another at Dunkirk when the steering gear failed. Under french law the pilot was not liable since he had not been grossly negligent.
Held: The appeal failed.
Sir Wilfred Greene MR said: ‘the clause does not extend to every pecuniary liability arising in respect of the collision but only to such liabilities as arise by way of damages. The word ‘damages’ is one which to an English lawyer conveys a sufficiently precise meaning. This document is an English contract which falls to be construed according to English law. That does not, of course, mean that in its application to liabilities arising under foreign law (an application which the parties, of course, clearly contemplated as possible) the operation of the clause is to be excluded merely because some liability arising under foreign law as a result of a collision does not precisely coincide with the liability which is recognised in the Courts of this country. Nevertheless it is necessary in my opinion, in construing a document of this kind, to give to the word ‘damages’ its ordinary meaning in English law. ‘Damages’ to an English lawyer imports this idea, that the sums payable by way of damages are sums which fall to be paid by reason of some breach of duty or obligation, whether that duty or obligation is imposed by contract, by the general law, or legislation.
Now, the measure of the duty, of course, will depend upon the particular law. A statute may impose an absolute obligation not to do certain things, and as the result of that the person injured by the doing of such a thing may have a right to damages. That is a question of the measure of the duty. An example which was referred to in the course of the discussion is to be found in the Air Navigation Act, 1920, s.9, sub-s I, under which damages are recoverable from the owner of aircraft who causes damage irrespective of negligence or intention: it is a standard of duty not to do certain things imposed by that statute. Looking at it from another point of view, there are certain classes of liability to make pecuniary payments which clearly fall outside the word ‘damages’. For instance, compensation paid under the Land Clauses Act or a matter of that kind is certainly not damages. Workmen’s compensation payments are certainly not damages in the ordinary sense of the word, and in spite of Mr McNair’s argument to the contrary I find it quite impossible to suppose that workmen’s compensation payments are included in the word ‘damages’ in this clause. The foundation of that class of liability is something entirely different from the foundation of the liability which gives rise to a claim for damages.’

Sir Wilfrid Greene MR
[1939] 1 KB 748
Citing:
Appeal fromHall Brothers Steamship Company Limited v Young 1938
The insured vessel, Trident, went to Dunkirk and engaged a French pilot whose pilot boat developed a fault in its steering gear which caused her to collide with Trident without Trident being in any way to blame. French law had a provision that . .

Cited by:
CitedYorkshire Water Services Ltd v Sun Alliance and London Insurance Plc and Others (1) CA 20-Aug-1996
The court was asked whether the costs of flood alleviation works were recoverable under public liability insurance policies.
Held: A claim for the costs of remedial action taken to mitigate future losses were not covered by the terms of the . .
CitedBedfordshire Police Authority v Constable and others ComC 20-Jun-2008
The authority insured its primary liability for compensation under the 1886 Act through the claimants and the excess of liability through re-insurers. The parties sought clarification from the court of the respective liabilities of the insurance . .
CitedBedfordshire Police Authority v Constable CA 12-Feb-2009
The police had responded to a riot at Yarlswood detention centre. They had insurance to cover their liability under the 1886 Act, but the re-insurers said that the insurance did not cover the event, saying that the liability was for statutory . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Insurance

Updated: 23 November 2021; Ref: scu.270262

Yorkshire Insurance Co Ltd v Nisbet Shipping Co Ltd: QBD 1961

The assured alone can give a valid receipt and discharge to a third party against whom a judgment has been given following a successful subrogated claim.
Diplock J said: ‘The expression ‘subrogation’ in relation to a contract of marine insurance is thus no more than a convenient way of referring to those terms which are to be implied in the contract between the assured and the insurer to give business efficacy to an agreement whereby the assured in the case of a loss against which the policy has been made shall be fully indemnified, and never more than fully indemnified.’ and ‘The simple principle which I apply is that the insurer cannot recover under the doctrine of subrogation … anything more than he has paid.’

Diplock J
[1962] 2 QB 330, [1961] 2 All ER 487
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedBee v Jenson ComC 21-Dec-2006
The defendant objected to paying the plaintiff the costs of a replacement hire car after the accident for which he was liable. He said that the plaintiff was in any event insured to recover that cost, and the insurance company were subrogated to the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 23 November 2021; Ref: scu.247979

Bee v Jenson: ComC 21 Dec 2006

The defendant objected to paying the plaintiff the costs of a replacement hire car after the accident for which he was liable. He said that the plaintiff was in any event insured to recover that cost, and the insurance company were subrogated to the plaintiff’s claim. He also said that the insurer should give credit for any commission received by the insurer from the hire company.
Held: The defendant was liable. The arrangements between the claimant and his insurers were not the concern of the defendant. It was necessary to distinguish subrogation to remedy an unjust enrichment, and contractual subrogation which was concerned only with the mutual rights and obligations under the insurance contract and did not affect strangers to the contract. The insurance benefit is not the provision of a car but rather the payment of hire charges. The fact that Mr Bee was the Hirer under the agreement and that there was an express right of subrogation in order to recover Vehicle Hire Costs indicate that DAS were not the providers of the car; they merely reserved the right to nominate the hire company which would be unnecessary were DAS providing the car themselves. Even if it was contemplated that Mr Bee would never pay the hire charge himself, nonetheless he was in receipt of an insurance benefit, namely an indemnity against the cost of hire.

Monson J
Times 16-Jan-2007, [2006] EWHC 3359 (Comm), [2007] Lloyd’s Rep IR Plus 32
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedCastellain v Preston 1883
The court emphasised the amplitude of the insurer’s right of subrogation which gave him ‘the advantage of every right of the assured, whether such right consists in contract, fulfilled or unfulfilled, or in remedy for tort capable of being insisted . .
CitedAdams v London Improved Motor Coach Builders Ltd CA 1921
The plaintiff successfully sued his employers for wrongful dismissal. The defendant argued it should not pay costs since it was the plaintiff’s union who had retained the solicitors in the case, and it was the union to which the solicitors looked . .
CitedYorkshire Insurance Co Ltd v Nisbet Shipping Co Ltd QBD 1961
The assured alone can give a valid receipt and discharge to a third party against whom a judgment has been given following a successful subrogated claim.
Diplock J said: ‘The expression ‘subrogation’ in relation to a contract of marine . .
CitedLagden v O’Connor HL 4-Dec-2003
The parties had been involved in a road traffic accident. The defendant drove into the claimant’s parked car. The claimant was unable to afford to hire a car pending repairs being completed, and arranged to hire a car on credit. He now sought . .
CitedBurdis v Livsey QBD 2001
The several cases claimed the cost of provision by credit hire companies of car hire and repair services to the innocent victims of road accidents. The transactions were ‘res inter alios acta’ – collateral to the commission of the tort. . .
CitedDimond v Lovell HL 12-May-2000
A claimant sought as part of her damages for the cost of hiring a care whilst her own was off the road after an accident caused by the defendant. She agreed with a hire company to hire a car, but payment was delayed until the claim was settled.
CitedDavies v Taylor (No 2) HL 2-Jan-1974
The plaintiff argued that no costs had been incurred by the successful defendant, as he was insured, and the insurance company was bound to pay his costs.
Held: ‘In this case the solicitors, no doubt first instructed by the insurance company, . .
CitedBanque Financiere De La Cite v Parc (Battersea) Ltd and Others HL 16-Apr-1998
The making of an order for restitution after finding an unjust enrichment by subrogation, is not dependant upon having found any common or unilateral intention of the parties. The House distinguished between contractual subrogation of the kind most . .
CitedHobbs v Marlowe HL 1978
The doctrine of subrogation in contracts of insurance operated entirely by virtue of an implied term of the contract of insurance: ‘I take it to be clear beyond all argument that an assured under a policy insuring him against loss of or damage to a . .
CitedCaledonian North Sea Ltd v London Bridge Engineering Ltd and Others IHCS 2000
Lord Rodger: ‘Subrogation works by giving the insurer who indemnifies the assured the right to raise proceedings in his name and, by the very nature of the circumstances in which it comes into play, the proceedings by the insurer must necessarily be . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 23 November 2021; Ref: scu.247978

Bank of Nova Scotia v Hellenic Mutual War Risks Association (Bermuda) Ltd (The Good Luck): HL 1992

The effect of breach of an insurance warranty is automatic, rather than dependant on any acceptance or election.
Lord Goff of Chieveley said: ‘So it is laid down in section 33(3) that, subject to any express provision in the policy, the insurer is discharged from liability as from the date of the breach of warranty. Those words are clear. They show that discharge of the insurer from liability is automatic and is not dependent upon any decision by the insurer to treat the contract or the insurance as at an end; though, under section 34(3), the insurer may waive the breach of warranty.
Section 33(3) of the Act reflects what has been described, in successive editions of Chalmers, The Marine Insurance Act 1906, as the inveterate practice in marine insurance of using the term ‘warranty’ as signifying a condition precedent.’ Lord Goff referred to Thomson -v- Weems and said ‘Once this is appreciated, it becomes readily understandable that, if a promissory warranty is not complied with, the insurer is discharged from liability as from the date of breach of warranty, for the simple reason that fulfilment of the warranty is a condition precedent to the liability of the insurer . . In the case of conditions precedent, the word ‘condition’ is being used in its classical sense in English law, under which the coming into existence of (for example) an obligation, or the duty or further duty to perform an obligation, is dependent upon the fulfilment of the specified condition. Here, where we are concerned with a promissory warranty, i.e. a promissory condition precedent, contained in an existing contract of insurance, non-fulfilment of the condition does not prevent the contract from coming into existence. What it does (as section 33(3) makes plain) is to discharge the insurer from liability as from the date of the breach. Certainly, it does not have the effect of discharging the contract ab initio. Nor, strictly speaking, does it have the effect of bringing the contract to an end. It is possible that there may be obligations of the assured under the contract which will survive the discharge of the insurer from liability, as for example a continuing liability to pay premium. Even if in the result no further obligations rest on either party, it is not correct to speak of the contract being avoided; and it is, strictly speaking, more accurate to keep to the carefully chosen words in section 33(3) of the Act, rather than to speak of the contract being brought to an end, though that may be the practical effect. When, as section 34(3) contemplates, the insurer waives a breach of a promissory warranty, the effect is that, to the extent of the waiver, the insurer cannot rely upon the breach as having discharged him from liability. This is a very different thing from saying that discharge of the insurer from liability is dependent upon a decision by the insurer.

Lord Goff of Chieveley
[1992] 1 AC 233
Marine Insurance Act 1906 33
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromBank of Nova Scotia v Hellenic Mutual War Risks Association (Bermuda) Ltd (The Good Luck) CA 1990
When a contract is to be construed purposively, the court must look to the purposes of both parties, not just one of them. No apportionment was to be applied under the 1945 Act: ‘Similarly, we think that the facts and circumstances of the present . .
CitedState Trading Corporation of India Ltd v M Golodetz Ltd CA 1989
Kerr LJ said: ‘What is commonly referred to as an acceptance of a repudiation must be communicated to the party in breach or at least overtly evinced. . An unequivocal act which is inconsistent with the subsistence of the contract may be sufficient, . .
CitedThomson v Weems HL 1884
Where a basis of the contract clause makes the correctness or completeness of the insured’s disclosure into a warranty, a breach of that warranty has the effect that the insurance cover never attaches under the contract.
Lord Blackburn said: . .

Cited by:
CitedAXA General Insurance Limited v Gottlieb CA 11-Feb-2005
The defendant made a claim under an insurance policy. The insurer made an interim payment, but then asserted that the claim was fraudulent, and sought recovery of the interim payment.
Held: At common law, fraud in an insurance claim, once . .
CitedBrit Syndicates Ltd and others v Italaudit Spa and others HL 12-Mar-2008
The parties disputed the extent of cover under an insurance policy. The insured firm of accountants had failed to verify the existence of a substantial balance claimed by the company it audited. The policy ‘included as an Assured Firm but solely in . .
CitedGenesis Housing Association Ltd v Liberty Syndicate Management Ltd CA 4-Oct-2013
The housing association was to develop an estate of social housing, supported by an insurance guarantee. The insurance proposal contained a clause stating that the information in the proposal was to form the basis of the policy, and that the policy . .
CitedGenesis Housing Association Ltd v Liberty Syndicate Management Ltd TCC 8-Nov-2012
Insurers had rejected a claim under the policy, saying that the proposal form had included a basis of insurance declaration warranted by the proposer, and that since it had named a main contractor different to the one named, there was no liability . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Transport

Updated: 23 November 2021; Ref: scu.223450

Yorkshire Water Services Ltd v Sun Alliance and London Insurance Plc and Others (1): CA 20 Aug 1996

The court was asked whether the costs of flood alleviation works were recoverable under public liability insurance policies.
Held: A claim for the costs of remedial action taken to mitigate future losses were not covered by the terms of the insurance policy. The court considered the relevance of American cases.
Stuart-Smith LJ said: ‘the American Courts adopt a much more benign attitude towards the insured; this seems to be based variously on the ‘folly’ argument in Leebov or ‘general principles of law and equity’ or that insurance contracts are: ‘contracts of adhesion between parties who are not equally situated’ giving rise to the principle: . . that doubts as to the existence or extent of coverage must generally be resolved in favour of insured . . or because the Courts have . . adopted the principle of giving effect to the objectively reasonable expectations of the insured for the purpose of rendering a ‘fair interpretation’ of the boundaries of insurance cover.’ As to the construction of contracts of insurance: ‘1. The words of the policy must be given their ordinary meaning and reflect the intention of the parties and the commercial sense of the agreement. Thus they must be construed in their context . . 2. A literal construction that leads to an absurd result or one otherwise manifestly contrary to the real intention of the parties should be rejected, if an alternative more reasonable construction can be adopted without doing violence to the language used. 3. In the case of ambiguity the construction which is more favourable to the insured should be adopted; this is the contra proferentem rule.’

Stuart-Smith LJ
Gazette 18-Sep-1996, Times 20-Aug-1996, [1997] 2 Lloyds Rep 21
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedCharter Reinsurance Co Ltd v Fagan and Others HL 24-May-1996
The re-insurers appealed against a finding that they were liable to make payment under a contract which required them to pay ‘sums actually paid.’ They said that the company having become insolvent, no payment would in fact be made.
Held: The . .
CitedHall Brothers Steamship Company Limited v Young CA 1939
The shipowners appealed a decision that the underwriters were not liable under collision liability clause. Their ship had collided with another at Dunkirk when the steering gear failed. Under french law the pilot was not liable since he had not been . .

Cited by:
CitedPilkington United Kingdom Limited v CGU Insurance Plc QBD 28-Jan-2004
The claimants had installed glass tiles in a roof. They fractured, and facing a claim for damages, they sought payment from their insurers. The claimants argued that the risk of fracture meant that the damage occurred upon installation, the insurers . .
CitedBlackburn Rovers Football and Athletic Club Plc v Avon Insurance Plc, Eagle Star Insurance Company Ltd, AGF Insurance Ltd IC Insurance Ltd ComC 15-Nov-2004
The claimant football club insured its players through the defendants. A footballer injured himself in training and his career was finished. The insurers rejected the claim, and relied upon exception clauses, saying that the true cause was a . .
CitedBedfordshire Police Authority v Constable and others ComC 20-Jun-2008
The authority insured its primary liability for compensation under the 1886 Act through the claimants and the excess of liability through re-insurers. The parties sought clarification from the court of the respective liabilities of the insurance . .
CitedBedfordshire Police Authority v Constable CA 12-Feb-2009
The police had responded to a riot at Yarlswood detention centre. They had insurance to cover their liability under the 1886 Act, but the re-insurers said that the insurance did not cover the event, saying that the liability was for statutory . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 23 November 2021; Ref: scu.90673

Spedition Welter Gmbh v Avanssur Sa: ECJ 10 Oct 2013

ECJ Insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles and enforcement of the obligation to insure against such liability – Directive 2009/103/EC – Article 21(5) – Claims representative – Authority to accept service of judicial documents – National rule making the validity of that service conditional on the express grant of an authority to accept it – Interpretation in conformity with Union law

C-306/12, [2013] EUECJ C-306/12
Bailii
Directive 2009/103/EC 21(5)

European, Road Traffic, Insurance

Updated: 22 November 2021; Ref: scu.516581

Enosi Epangelmation Asfaliston Ellados v Ipourgos Anaptixis: ECJ 17 Oct 2013

ECJ Directive 2002/92/EC – Insurance mediation – Exclusion of the activities pursued by an insurance undertaking or an employee acting under the responsibility of such an undertaking – Whether it is possible for such an employee to pursue insurance mediation activities on an incidental basis – Professional requirements

C-555/11, [2013] EUECJ C-555/11
Bailii
Directive 2002/92/EC
European

Insurance

Updated: 22 November 2021; Ref: scu.516573

Genesis Housing Association Ltd v Liberty Syndicate Management Ltd: CA 4 Oct 2013

The housing association was to develop an estate of social housing, supported by an insurance guarantee. The insurance proposal contained a clause stating that the information in the proposal was to form the basis of the policy, and that the policy would be void if any fact warranted in the proposal was wrong. The form mis-identified the main contractors.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘where a proposal form contains a ‘basis of contract’ clause, (i) the proposal form has contractual effect even if the policy contains no reference to the proposal form; (ii) all statements in the proposal form constitute warranties on which the insurance contract is based. They cannot therefore be treated as immaterial. ‘

Lord Dyson MR, Jackson, Gloster LJJ
[2013] EWCA Civ 1173, [2013] WLR(D) 368
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedCondogianis v The Guardian Assurance Company Limited PC 2-May-1921
Australia – The insured had filled out a proposal form for fire insurance incorrectly having failed to mention in his answer to a question about a second of two fires for which he had previously claimed. The proposal form contained a declaration . .
Appeal fromGenesis Housing Association Ltd v Liberty Syndicate Management Ltd TCC 8-Nov-2012
Insurers had rejected a claim under the policy, saying that the proposal form had included a basis of insurance declaration warranted by the proposer, and that since it had named a main contractor different to the one named, there was no liability . .
CitedDawsons Ltd v Bonnin HL 1922
The House considered whether a provision was a warranty rather than a representation, allowing the contract to be avoided for its breach. It was an inadvertently inaccurate statement by the insured in the proposal form which was expressly . .
CitedRozanes v Bowen CA 1928
The court considered a proposal form for a jeweler’s block policy as filled in by the insured or his agent which incorrectly identified only one previous loss although there were several previous losses. The form stated that ‘It is understood that . .
CitedHolmes v Scottish Legal Life Assurance Society KBD 1932
There had been an honest misstatement made by a son about his father’s health in a proposal form for a life insurance. The proposal form was made ‘the basis of the contract’ and there was a further provision in the policy that it could be avoided if . .
CitedBank of Nova Scotia v Hellenic Mutual War Risks Association (Bermuda) Ltd (The Good Luck) HL 1992
The effect of breach of an insurance warranty is automatic, rather than dependant on any acceptance or election.
Lord Goff of Chieveley said: ‘So it is laid down in section 33(3) that, subject to any express provision in the policy, the insurer . .
CitedUnipac (Scotland) Ltd v Aegon Insurance Co (UK) Ltd SCS 1996
(Inner House) Information set out in a proposal form was incorrect and the declaration made by the insured was incorporated as the basis of the insurance. The insurer repudiated liability. . .
CitedUnipac (Scotland) Ltd v Aegon Insurance Co (UK) Ltd SCS 1996
(Inner House) Information set out in a proposal form was incorrect and the declaration made by the insured was incorporated as the basis of the insurance. The insurer repudiated liability. . .
CitedEconomides v Commercial Union Assurance Co Plc CA 22-May-1997
The insured represented to the insurers that to ‘the best of his knowledge and belief’ the full cost of replacing all the contents in his flat as new was pounds 16,000. He contended that that meant that he honestly believed that pounds 16,000 was . .
CitedJagjivan Kumar v AGF Insurance Ltd ComC 10-Nov-1997
The court was concerned with a claim under a solicitors’ professional liability top up insurance policy. By clause 5 the insurer undertook ‘not to avoid repudiate or rescind this insurance upon any ground whatsoever including in particular . .
CitedZeller v British Caymanian Insurance Company Ltd PC 16-Jan-2008
(Cayman Islands) The Board considered the effect of a misdeclaration on a proposal for medical insurance.
Lord Bingham considered a statement which was said to be ‘complete and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief’. Lord Bingham . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 21 November 2021; Ref: scu.516255

Smith v Chadwick: HL 1884

Unclear Words Insufficient as Representation

A purchaser claimed to have entered into the contract in reliance on the truth of a misrepresentation by the seller. The plaintiff claimed damages for deceit through having been induced to buy shares in an iron company by false representations in a prospectus as to the output of the iron works.
Held: His claim failed because the critical words of the prospectus were ambiguous, and the plaintiff had failed to show that he understood them in a sense which was false.
An inference of inducement can be made or rebutted on evidence. Lord Blackburn, said: ‘I think if it is proved that the defendants with a view to induce the plaintiff to enter a contract made a statement to the plaintiff of such a nature as would be likely to induce a person to enter into a contract, and it is proved that the plaintiff did enter into the contract, it is a fair inference of fact that he was induced to do so by the statement.’
. . and ‘In Pasley v Freeman, 2 Smith’s Leading Cases 66, 73, 86 (8th ed), Buller J says: ‘The foundation of this action is fraud and deceit in the defendant and damage to the plaintiffs. And the question is whether an action thus founded can be sustained in a court of law. Fraud without damage, or damage without fraud, gives no cause of action, but where these two concur an action lies, per Croke J, 3 Bulst 95.’
Whatever difficulties there may be as to defining what is fraud and deceit, I think no one will venture to dispute that the plaintiff cannot recover unless he proves damage. In an ordinary action of deceit the plaintiff alleges that false and fraudulent representations were made by the defendant to the plaintiff in order to induce him, the plaintiff, to act upon them. I think that if he did act upon these representations, he shews damage; if he did not, he shews none.’
Lord Selborne LC said: ‘My Lords, I conceive that in an action of deceit, like the present, it is the duty of the plaintiff to establish two things; first, actual fraud, which is to be judged by the nature and character of the representations made, considered with reference to the object for which they were made, the knowledge or means of knowledge of the person making them, and the intention which the law justly imputes to every man to produce those consequences which are the natural result of his acts: and, secondly, he must establish that this fraud was an inducing cause to the contract; for which purpose it must be material, and it must have produced in his mind an erroneous belief, influencing his conduct.’

Lord Blackburn, Lord Selborne LC
(1884) 9 App Cas 187
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedAssicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC) CA 13-Nov-2002
Rehearing/Review – Little Difference on Appeal
The appellant asked the Court to reverse a decision on the facts reached in the lower court.
Held: The appeal failed (Majority decision). The court’s approach should be the same whether the case was dealt with as a rehearing or as a review. . .
CitedSpice Girls Ltd v Aprilia World Service Bv ChD 24-Feb-2000
Disclosure Duties on those entering into contract
The claimants worked together as a five girl pop group. The defendants had signed a sponsorship agreement, but now resisted payment saying that one of the five, Geri, had given notice to leave the group, substantially changing what had been . .
CitedSt Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co (UK) Ltd v McConnell Dowell Constructors Ltd CA 1995
The court discussed the general principles as to the meaning of ‘inducement’ in the context of insurance contract.
Held: If the three underwriters who gave evidence had been told the truth, on no view would they have underwritten the insurance . .
CitedMundi v Lincoln Assurance Ltd ChD 24-Nov-2005
The defendant life insurance company sought to avoid payment alleging non-disclosure. At first they suggested first one then a second and then a third reason for non payment as each previous reason looked like failing. They relied now on . .
CitedHayward v Zurich Insurance Company Plc SC 27-Jul-2016
The claimant had won a personal injury case and the matter had been settled with a substantial payout by the appellant insurance company. The company now said that the claimant had grossly exaggerated his injury, and indeed wasfiully recovered at . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Insurance, Torts – Other

Updated: 19 November 2021; Ref: scu.187266

Teal Assurance Company Ltd v WR Berkley Insurance (Europe) Ltd: SC 31 Jul 2013

An international engineering company had several layers of professional indemnity insurance. The top later did not cover claims originating in the US or Canada. The several insurers now disputed apportionment of liability between them. The appellants (Teal) appealed against decisions below that it was not entitled to select which claims to apportion to which policies, and that claimas must be apportioned to the successive layers as they fell.
Held: The appeal failed. Once the insured’s liability was settled, whether by agreement, judgment or award, the insured incurred expenses, within the scope of a liability policy A claim arose under the policy. That claim would either exhaust the policy cover entirely or pro tanto.
However, the insured may choose not to notify the claim to the insurers, and the policy would not thereby be exhausted.

Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Sumption, Lord Toulson
[2013] UKSC 57, [2014] Lloyd’s Rep IR 56, [2013] WLR(D) 332, [2013] 2 CLC 390, [2013] 4 All ER 643, [2013] BUS LR 109, [2013] 2 All ER (Comm) 1009, UKSC 2012/0014
Bailii, WLRD, Bailii Summary, SC Smmary, SC
England and Wales
Citing:
At First InstanceTeal Assurance Company Ltd v W R Berkley Insurance (Europe) Ltd and Another ComC 31-Jan-2011
The parties disputed the proper construction and the operation of an excess reinsurance policy of professional liability insurance, and more specifically about how it is determined whether the ‘excess point’ that triggers the reinsurance cover has . .
Appeal fromTeal Assurance Company Ltd v WR Berkley Insurance (Europe) Ltd and Another CA 15-Dec-2011
. .
CitedPost Office v Norwich Union Fire Insurance Society Ltd CA 1967
A contract of insurance provided an indemnity for ‘all sums which the insured shall become legally liable to pay as compensation in respect of loss of property’. The claim was by the Post Office against a contractor, Potters, for damaging one of . .
CitedBradley v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd HL 1989
Mrs Bradley was employed by Dart Mill several times from 1933 and 1970 and acquired byssinosis from inhaling cotton dust. The company was wound up in 1975 and dissolved in 1976. In 1984 she applied to the court for pre-action disclosure under . .
CitedNorth River Ins Co v American Home Assurance Co 15-Mar-1989
California Court of Appeals . .
CitedRainy Sky Sa and Others v Kookmin Bank SC 2-Nov-2011
Commercial Sense Used to Interpret Contract
The Court was asked as to the role of commercial good sense in the construction of a term in a contract which was open to alternative interpretations.
Held: The appeal succeeded. In such a case the court should adopt the more, rather than the . .
CitedSprung v Royal Insurance (UK) Ltd CA 1999
An insured cannot recover damages at large for an insurer’s failure to pay. Interest on sums due under a policy is adequate compensation for late payment; this is so, even if an insurer deliberately withholds sums which he knows to be due under a . .
CitedVentouris v Mountain CA 1991
It is in the interests of the state which provides the court system and its judges at taxpayers’ expense that legal advisers should be able to encourage strong cases and discourage weak cases. ‘It is the protection of confidential communications . .
CitedApostolos Konstantine Ventouris v Trevor Rex Mountain, The Italia Express No 2 QBD 1992
A contract of marine insurance is not one to provide peace of mind or freedom from distress.
An assured cannot recover for losses caused by the insurer’s wrongful refusal to pay a valid claim. Interest on the sum is an adequate compensation. . .
CitedCox v Bankside Members Agency Ltd and Others QBD 27-Jan-1995
Some agents had policies against which there were likely to be various calls, either because several claims were being pursued against the same agents by different Lloyd’s Names, or because the policies were group policies covering several agents . .
CitedCox v Bankside Members Agency Ltd and Others CA 16-May-1995
Successful Lloyds names were entitled to enforce their claims in the normal time sequence. The transfer of the rights of the insured against the insurer under section 1(1) the 1930 Act takes place on the event of insolvency, even if the insured’s . .
CitedCharter Reinsurance Co Ltd v Fagan and Others CA 6-Nov-1995
Liability of re-insurers arises on insurers becoming liable to pay, not payment. . .
CitedCharter Reinsurance Co Ltd v Fagan and Others HL 24-May-1996
The re-insurers appealed against a finding that they were liable to make payment under a contract which required them to pay ‘sums actually paid.’ They said that the company having become insolvent, no payment would in fact be made.
Held: The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 18 November 2021; Ref: scu.514221

John Paton Skilling v Zenith Insurance Plc: ScSf 31 Jan 2013

The pursuer sought indemnity from his insurers. They said that he had failed to disclose the fact that his car was an Audi A4 Quattro. He said that the on-line system through which he had applied did not allow him to make that specification, though there were later opportunities to do so. The insurers did not at that time have the facility to identify a car’s specification from its registration details.
Held: The pursuer had not acted in utmost good faith and his action failed: ‘An Audi A4 DTM FSI QUATTRO is a limited edition car. It`s power has gone from 197 bhp in the normal car to 217 bhp and a top speed of 152 mph. As its name implies the car is a four wheel drive vehicle. The A4 DTM FSI QUATTRO bears a little resemblance to the standard A4 two litre. ‘

Sherif Thomas Ward
[2013] ScotSC 23
Bailii

Insurance, Scotland

Updated: 17 November 2021; Ref: scu.513815

Verderame v Commercial Union Assurance Co Plc: CA 2 Apr 1992

The insurance brokers, acting to arrange insurance for a small private limited company did not owe a duty in tort to the directors of that company personally. Where an action was brought in a tort and in breach of contract, damages could not be awarded on the tort where they were not available in contract.

Balcombe LJ
[1992] BCLC 793, Times 02-Apr-1992
England and Wales
Citing:
FollowedWatts and Co v Morrow CA 30-Jul-1991
The plaintiff had bought a house on the faith of the defendant’s report that there were only limited defects requiring repair. In fact the defects were much more extensive. The defendant surveyor appealed against an award of damages after his . .

Cited by:
CitedJohnson v Gore Wood and Co (a Firm) CA 12-Nov-1998
The claimant had previously issued a claim against the defendant solicitors through his company. He now sought to pursue a claim in his own name. It was resisted as an abuse of process, and on the basis that no personal duty of care was owed to the . .
CitedHamilton Jones v David and Snape (a Firm) ChD 19-Dec-2003
The claimant was represented by the respondent firm of solicitors in an action for custody of her children. Through their negligence the children had been removed from the country. She sought damages for the distress of losing her children.
Agency, Insurance, Company, Contract, Negligence, Damages

Updated: 16 November 2021; Ref: scu.181818

Csonka v Magyar Allam: ECJ 11 Jul 2013

ECJ Use of motor vehicles – Insurance against civil liability – Directive 72/166/EEC – Article 3(1) – Directive 84/5/EEC – Article 1(4), first subparagraph – Insolvency of the insurer – No payment of compensation by the body providing compensation

C-409/11, [2013] EUECJ C-409/11
Bailii
Directive 72/166/EEC 3(1), Directive 84/5/EEC 1(4)

European, Insurance

Updated: 15 November 2021; Ref: scu.512336

Walter Endress v Allianz Lebensversicherungs-Ag: ECJ 11 Jul 2013

ECJ Opinion – Life assurance – Right of cancellation – Cancellation period – Starting point and duration – Communication of information

Sharpston AG
C-209/12, [2013] EUECJ C-209/12
Bailii
European
Cited by:
OpinionWalter Endress v Allianz Lebensversicherungs-Ag ECJ 19-Dec-2013
ECJ Request for a preliminary ruling – Directives 90/619/EEC and 92/96/EEC – Direct life assurance – Right of cancellation – Lack of information on the conditions governing the exercise of that right – Expiry of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Consumer

Updated: 15 November 2021; Ref: scu.512345

Versloot Dredging Bv and Another v Hdi Gerling Industrie Versicherung Ag and Others: ComC 14 Jun 2013

The claimant shipowners suffered damage to their vessel and claimed under their policy with the defendants. The defendants argued that part of the evidence supporting the explanation of the claim was fabricated, thus excusing any payment.
Held: The loss was proximately caused by a peril of the seas, namely the fortuitous entry of seawater through the sea inlet valve during the voyage, and that the relevant part of the Inchmaree clause had no application to this peril. The lie was irrelevant to the merits of the claim. However, the claim was disallowed
Popplewell J said: ‘In a scale of culpability which may attach to fraudulent conduct relating to the making of claims, this was at the low end. It was a reckless untruth, not a carefully planned deceit. It was told on one occasion, not persisted in at the trial. It was told in support of a theory about the events surrounding the casualty which Chris Kornet genuinely believed to be a plausible explanation. The reckless untruth was put forward against the background of having made the crew available for interview by the Underwriters’ solicitor, who had had the opportunity to make his own inquiries of the crew on the topic. To be deprived of a valid claim of some 3.2m Euros as a result of such reckless untruth is, in my view, a disproportionately harsh sanction.’
He regarded the result as unjust to the parties: ‘In a scale of culpability which may attach to fraudulent conduct relating to the making of claims, this was at the low end. It was a reckless untruth, not a carefully planned deceit. It was told on one occasion, not persisted in at the trial. It was told in support of a theory about the events surrounding the casualty which Chris Kornet genuinely believed to be a plausible explanation. The reckless untruth was put forward against the background of having made the crew available for interview by the Underwriters’ solicitor, who had had the opportunity to make his own inquiries of the crew on the topic. To be deprived of a valid claim of some 3.2m Euros as a result of such reckless untruth is, in my view, a disproportionately harsh sanction.’

Popplewell J
[2013] EWHC 1666 (Comm)
Bailii
Marine Insurance Act 1906 39(5)
England and Wales
Citing:
See AlsoVersloot Dredging Bv and Another v Hdi Gerling Industrie Versicherung Ag and Others (Rev 1) ComC 14-Jun-2013
. .

Cited by:
At ComCVersloot Dredging Bv and Another v Hdi Gerling Industrie Versicherung Ag and Others CA 16-Oct-2014
. .
At ComCVersloot Dredging Bv and Another v Hdi Gerling Industrie Versicherung Ag and Others SC 20-Jul-2016
The ‘DC MERWESTONE’ suffered a water ingress of water flooding the engine room. This resulted from (i) the negligence of the crew in failing to close the sea inlet valve of the emergency fire pump and drain down the system, after they had used the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 14 November 2021; Ref: scu.510957

Versloot Dredging Bv and Another v Hdi Gerling Industrie Versicherung Ag and Others (Rev 1): ComC 14 Jun 2013

[2013] EWHC 1667 (Comm)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
See AlsoVersloot Dredging Bv and Another v Hdi Gerling Industrie Versicherung Ag and Others ComC 14-Jun-2013
The claimant shipowners suffered damage to their vessel and claimed under their policy with the defendants. The defendants argued that part of the evidence supporting the explanation of the claim was fabricated, thus excusing any payment.
Transport, Insurance

Updated: 14 November 2021; Ref: scu.510958

Manifest Shipping Co Ltd v Uni-Polaris Shipping Co Ltd and Others: HL 23 Jan 2001

The claimant took out insurance on its fleet of ships (the Star Sea). It had been laid up in its off season. The ship’s safety certificates were renewed before it sailed. It was damaged by fire. The insurers asserted that the ship had been unseaworthy, and that that was causative of the fire, and that the claimants knew of the condition, and that they had withheld a privileged expert report, said to be relevant to an allegation that the insured had knowingly sent the vessel to sea in an unseaworthy condition.
Held: That defence failed. The insurers then claimed that after litigation had commenced, the claimants had failed to make proper disclosure, and that since the contract was uberrimae fidei, that vitiated the entire insurance contract. It was not said the parties had actual knowledge of the unseaworthiness, but that they had ‘blind eye knowledge’. Such blind eye knowledge required a positive decision not to look. That was not established, and the appeal failed.
Liability for dishonest assistance requires a dishonest state of mind on the part of the person who assists in a breach of trust. Such a state of mind may consist in knowledge that the transaction is one in which he cannot honestly participate, or it may consist in suspicion combined with a conscious decision not to make inquiries which might result in knowledge.
Lord Scott of Foscote said: ‘Blind-eye’ knowledge approximates to knowledge. Nelson at the battle of Copenhagen made a deliberate decision to place the telescope to his blind eye in order to avoid seeing what he knew he would see if he placed it to his good eye. It is, I think, common ground – and if it is not, it should be – that an imputation of blind-eye knowledge requires an amalgam of suspicion that certain facts may exist and a decision to refrain from taking any step to confirm their existence.’
Lord Hobhouse observed: ‘The logic is simple. The fraudulent insured must not be allowed to think: if the fraud is successful, then I will gain; if it is unsuccessful, I will lose nothing.’
As to the Litsion Pride case, Lord Hobhouse said: ‘The particular claim was only fraudulent in so far as the broker had not been truthful in dealing with the insurers at that stage. The reasoning adopted by Hirst J has been criticised both by academic writers and by other judges in later cases. I consider that it should not any longer be treated as a sound statement of the law. . . In so far as it is based upon the principle of the irrecoverability of fraudulent claims, the decision is questionable upon the facts since the actual claim made was a valid claim for a loss which had occurred and had been caused by a peril insured against when the vessel was covered by a held covered clause.’

Lord Steyn Lord Hoffmann Lord Clyde Lord Hobhouse of Wood- borough Lord Scott of Foscote
Times 23-Jan-2001, [2001] 1 All ER 743, [2001] 2 WLR 170, [2001] UKHL 1, [2003] 1 AC 469
House of Lords, Bailii
Marine Insurance Act 1906 39(5) 35(2)
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedThomas v Tyne and Wear SS Freight Insurance Association 1917
For an insurer to set up a defence under claim for the loss of a ship on the grounds of the unseaworthiness of the vessel, the unseaworthiness must have been causative of the relevant loss. . .
CitedStandard Oil Co of New York v Clan Line Steamers HL 1924
A ship sank with the entire loss of the cargo. The cargo owners sought damages from the owners, saying that the ship was unseaworthy. The ship was of an unusual construction, requiring a certain amount of water ballast to be mainatined for the ship . .
CitedThe Gloria 1935
‘I think that if it were shown that an owner had reason to believe that his ship was in fact unseaworthy, and deliberately refrained from an examination which would have turned his belief into knowledge, he might properly be held privy to the . .
Appeal fromManifest Shipping Co Ltd v Uni-Polaris Shipping Co Ltd and Another CA 23-Jan-1997
The results which would follow from a fraudulent insurance claim should not to be extended similarly to follow from culpable non-disclosure in the absence of fraud. . .
CitedBlack King Shipping Corpn and Wayang (Panama) SA v Massie (The ‘Litsion Pride’) 1985
The LITSION PRIDE was insured against war risks. The terms required of her owners, notice as soon as practicable of her entry into specified war zones and then to pay an additional premium. The owners traded her into a war zone without giving . .

Cited by:
CitedAgapitos and Another v Agnew and others CA 6-Mar-2002
Insurers resisted a claim saying that fraudulent acts of the defendants to promote an otherwise valid claim, made the entire claim void. The insurance required certificates to be obtained before ‘hot’ works were undertaken as part of the ship’s . .
CitedDrake Insurance Plc v Provident Insurance Plc ComC 3-Feb-2003
A driver caused an accident, and the claimant insurance company paid out. It now sought a contribution from the defendant, who had also insured the driver, but had denied liability. The driver was a named additional driver under the second policy, . .
CitedAXA General Insurance Limited v Gottlieb CA 11-Feb-2005
The defendant made a claim under an insurance policy. The insurer made an interim payment, but then asserted that the claim was fraudulent, and sought recovery of the interim payment.
Held: At common law, fraud in an insurance claim, once . .
CitedBarlow Clowes International Ltd and Another v Eurotrust International Ltd and others PC 10-Oct-2005
(Court of Appeal of the Isle of Man) Defendants appealed a finding of dishonest assistance in the activities of Barlow Clowes.
Held: The judge had been able to reach the conclusions on the basis of the evidence. The appeal of the deemster . .
CitedMeretz Investments Nv and Another v ACP Ltd and others ChD 30-Jan-2006
The applicant challenged the exercise of a power of sale under a mortgage, saying that the mortgagee’s purposes included purposes not those under the mortgage. The parties had been involved in an attempted development of a penthouse.
Held: The . .
CitedDouglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others; similar HL 2-May-2007
In Douglas, the claimants said that the defendants had interfered with their contract to provide exclusive photographs of their wedding to a competing magazine, by arranging for a third party to infiltrate and take and sell unauthorised photographs. . .
CitedFairclough Homes Ltd v Summers SC 27-Jun-2012
The respondent had made a personal injury claim, but had then been discovered to have wildly and dishonestly exaggerated the damages claim. The defendant argued that the court should hand down some condign form of punishment, and appealed against . .
CitedVersloot Dredging Bv and Another v Hdi Gerling Industrie Versicherung Ag and Others SC 20-Jul-2016
The ‘DC MERWESTONE’ suffered a water ingress of water flooding the engine room. This resulted from (i) the negligence of the crew in failing to close the sea inlet valve of the emergency fire pump and drain down the system, after they had used the . .
CitedWillers v Joyce and Another (Re: Gubay (Deceased) No 1) SC 20-Jul-2016
Parties had been involved in an action for wrongful trading. This was not persisted with but the claimant sought damages saying that the action was only part of a campaign to do him harm. This appeal raised the question whether the tort of malicious . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Transport

Leading Case

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.83379

Lexington Insurance Co v AGF Insurance Ltd: HL 30 Jul 2009

The respondent insurers had been held liable in Washington, and had been granted indemnity against the appellants by the Court of Appeal. The insurance contract had been under the law of Pennsylvania, but that of the re-insurance under the law of England and Wales.
Held: The claimant’s appeal succeeded. The re-insurance contract was governed by English law. If it was to be construed according to the law of another jurisdiction, that jurisdiction must have been capable of being identified at the time when the contract was made.

Lord Mance said: ‘a reinsurance is a separate contract, which may contain its own independent terms requiring to be satisfied before insurers can claim indemnity under it. To take an obvious example, the present reinsurance was not a perfectly proportional reinsurance, by virtue of the retention of $1,675,000. More fundamentally, even a perfectly proportional reinsurance is not an insurance against liability, still less against any liability which the reinsured may be held to incur under the insurance. ‘ and ‘ the reinsurance is an independent contract, with its own terms which fall to be construed under English law, and I see no basis for interpreting it as covering any liability which might subsequently be held to arise under the insurance in any State whose law might, after disputes had arisen under it and other separate insurances, be applied by reference to factors extraneous to the particular insurance to which alone the reinsurance related It follows that there is no basis for construing the two contracts as back to back in the present situation.’ and
‘under English law, a contract has a meaning which is to be ascertained at the time when it is concluded, having regard to its background and the surrounding circumstances within the parties’ knowledge at that time. ‘

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, Lord Mance and Lord Collins of Mapesbury
[2009] UKHL 40, Times 13-Aug-2009, [2009] Bus LR 1452, [2009] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 508, [2010] 1 AC 180, [2009] 4 All ER 909, [2009] Lloyd’s Rep IR 675, [2009] 3 WLR 575, [2010] Env LR D1
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedBritish Dominions General Insurance Co Ltd v Duder KBD 1915
The court was asked whether the insurers, having settled the owners’ claim for a constructive total loss at 66 per cent. of the sum insured could recover 100 per cent. from their re-insurers. Bailhache J. held that they could, with the result that . .
CitedForsikringsaktieselskapt Vesta v Butcher HL 1988
A contract of insurance and a facultative reinsurance, under which part of the original risk was reinsured, contained warranties in identical terms.
Held: The warranty in the reinsurance policy, which was governed by English law, should be . .
CitedForsikringsaktieselskabet National (of Copenhagen) v Attorney-General HL 1925
Viscount Cave LC said that ‘by a contract of reinsurance the reinsuring party insures the original insuring party against the original loss.’ . .
CitedGroupama Navigation Et Transports; Continent Sa; Mutuelles Du Mans; Zurich International France SA and Gie Generali Transports (Bodies Corporate) v V Catatumbo Seguros (a Body Corporate) CA 20-Jul-2000
. .
CitedJohn Knight, William Ware And Others Against Faith And Another 23-Sep-1850
A ship, insured in 1000l. for a year ending 23rd September, was stranded, got off, and brought into the harbour of Sta. Cruz, on September 16th. She remained there with her crew on board till the middle of October, and, during that time, was pumped; . .
CitedMunicipal Mutual Insurance Limited v Sea Insurance Company Limited and Others CA 26-Mar-1998
The unifying event in an aggregation clause in an insurance policy was expressed in very general terms: ‘all occurrences of a series consequent on or attributable to one source or original cause.’
Held: As long as one could find any act, event . .
CitedHill and Others v Mercantile and General Reinsurance Co Plc; Berry and Others v Same HL 15-Aug-1996
Liability under reinsurance was not invalidated by a compromise including other claims. The parties to reinsurance contracts could set their own ways of proving the loss within a contract. A Full Reinsurance Clause is not binding in respect of any . .
CitedRe London Marine Insurance Association 1869
. .
CitedJoyce v Realm Marine Insurance Co 1872
The insurance covered (inter alia) cargo from ports in West Africa with outward cargo to be considered homeward interest 24 hours after the ship’s arrival at her first port of discharge. The reinsurance was at and from West African ports ‘to . .
CitedBalfour v Beaumont 1984
. .
CitedYouell and Others v Bland Welch and Co Ltd and Others CA 1992
The court considered whether an underwiter’s slip was admissible when construing the policy which followed.
Held: Staughton LJ said: ‘It is now, in my view, somewhat old-fashioned to approach such a problem armed with the parol evidence rule, . .
CitedBolton Metropolitan Borough Council v Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd CA 6-Feb-2006
The deceased had come into contact with asbestos when working on building sites for more than one contractor. The claimant here sought contribution from the defendants for the damages it had paid to his estate. The issue was as to liability on . .
CitedWhitworth Street Estates (Manchester) Ltd v James Miller and Partners Ltd CA 1969
The parties, one in England and one in Scotland agreed to perform certain actions in Scotland. Any dispute was to be settled by arbitration, but it was not said whether this would be in England or Scotland. The curial law of arbitration would decide . .
CitedCompagnie Tunisienne de Navigation SA v Compagnie d’Armement Maritime SA HL 1970
The court considered what was the proper law of the contract. The inquiry must always be to discover the law with which the contract has the closest and most real connection. The mere fact that arbitration was to be in London did not mean that what . .
CitedWhitworth Street Estates (Manchester) Ltd v James Miller and Partners Ltd HL 1970
The parties disagreed as to the curial law of an arbitration agreement. The proper law of the building contract and the arbitration agreement was English but the reference was conducted in Scotland.
Held: Evidence of behaviour after a contract . .
CitedThe Iran Vojdan 1984
Electric cable was carried on an Iranian flagged vessel from Hamburg to Dubai. The plaintiff consignees, alleging that the cargo was damaged, commenced proceedings against the shipowners in the English courts. The defendants sought a stay on saying . .
CitedAmin Rasheed Shipping Corp v Kuwait Insurance Co HL 1983
A claimant must show good reason why service on a foreign defendant should be permitted. This head of jurisdiction was an exorbitant jurisdiction, one which, under general English conflict rules, an English court would not recognise as possessed by . .
CitedCharter Reinsurance Co Ltd v Fagan and Others HL 24-May-1996
The re-insurers appealed against a finding that they were liable to make payment under a contract which required them to pay ‘sums actually paid.’ They said that the company having become insolvent, no payment would in fact be made.
Held: The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, International

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.368927

Pratt v Aigaion Insurance Company SA (‘the Resolute’): CA 27 Nov 2008

The court considered the interpretation of a term in a contract of insurance to the effect that ‘Warranted Owner and/or Owner’s experienced skipper on board and in charge at all times and one experienced crew member.’, asking whether ‘at all times’ meant 24 hours a day.
Held: The owner’s appeal succeeded. If underwriters wish to have a warranty with draconian consequences they must stipulate for it in clear terms. The clause should be construed contra proferentem, that is against the insurer. Other cases on different clauses were not necessarily good guidance. The principal purpose of the clause was to protect the vessel when two experienced crew members were on board, namely at times when she was manoeuvering. ‘At the time the crew left, the vessel was safely tied up alongside, as must happen very often. Sometimes, no doubt, the generator was left running and sometimes it was not. If the insurer wanted the owner or skipper and an experienced crew member on board whenever the vessel was left with the generator still running it should clearly have so provided. So too, if the insurer wanted them on board whenever the vessel was left, it should clearly have so stipulated. It did not.’

CLarke MR, Maurice Kay LJ, Stanley Burnton LJ
[2008] EWCA Civ 1314, Times 03-Dec-2008, [2009] Lloyd’s Rep IR 149, [2008] 2 CLC 756, [2009] 2 All ER (Comm) 387, [2009] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 225
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedF L Schuler AG v Wickman Machine Tools Sales Limited HL 4-Apr-1973
The parties entered an agreement to distribute and sell goods in the UK. They disagreed as to the meaning of a term governing the termination of the distributorship.
Held: The court can not take into account the post-contractual conduct or . .
CitedAntaios Compania Naviera SA v Salen Rederierna AB (‘the Antaios’) HL 1984
A ship charterer discovered that the bills of lading were incorrect, but delayed withdrawal from the charter for 13 days. They now sought leave to appeal the arbitration award against them.
Held: Though he deprecated extending the use of the . .
CitedCharter Reinsurance Co Ltd v Fagan and Others HL 24-May-1996
The re-insurers appealed against a finding that they were liable to make payment under a contract which required them to pay ‘sums actually paid.’ They said that the company having become insolvent, no payment would in fact be made.
Held: The . .
CitedInvestors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society HL 19-Jun-1997
Account taken of circumstances wihout ambiguity
The respondent gave advice on home income plans. The individual claimants had assigned their initial claims to the scheme, but later sought also to have their mortgages in favour of the respondent set aside.
Held: Investors having once . .
CitedBrownsville Holdings Ltd v Adamjee Insurance Co Ltd (‘The Milasan’) 2000
A 90 foot motor yacht sank in calm weather in the course of a voyage from Piraeus to Sardinia with a crew of three: a skipper, an engineer and a deckhand.
Held: The owner’s insurance claim failed. There had been a breach of warranty in these . .
CitedSirius International Insurance Company (Publ) v FAI General Insurance Limited and others HL 2-Dec-2004
The appellant had taken certain insurance risks on behalf of the respondents, subject to banking indemnities. Disputes arose and were settled under a Tomlin order, which was now itself subject to challenge.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The . .
CitedBank of Credit and Commerce International SA v Ali, Khan and others (No 1); BCCI v Ali HL 1-Mar-2001
Cere Needed Releasing Future Claims
A compromise agreement which appeared to claim to settle all outstanding claims between the employee and employer, did not prevent the employee later claiming for stigma losses where, at the time of the agreement, the circumstances which might lead . .
CitedGE Frankona Reinsurance Ltd v CMM Trust No.1400 (the ‘Newfoundland Explorer’) AdCt 22-Mar-2006
The owner sought to claim under his insurance policy. The yacht was, in the policy warranted to be fully crewed at all times. The owner had left the boat to return a few hours later when it was found on fire.
Held: The insurance claim failed. . .

Cited by:
CitedHorwood and Others v Land of Leather Ltd and Others ComC 18-Mar-2010
The claimants sought to claim for personal injuries against the defendant company, now in administration, and their insurers using the 1930 Act. The insurers said they were not liable to indemnify the company. The parties disputed the standing of an . .
CitedAC Ward and Son v Catlin (Five) Ltd and Others CA 10-Sep-2009
The defendant insurers appealed against refusal of summary judgment in its favour in defending a claim under a policy. The claimants premises had been burgled. The insurer said that the claimant had failed to respect warranties given by it as to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Transport

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.278301

Dalamd Ltd v Butterworth Spengler Commercial Ltd: ComC 5 Oct 2018

Conflicting Insurance Policies – Disclosure Error

An assured operated a waste recycling facility. It held two relevant polices of insurance, with different insurers. The insurers both claimed that they were entitled to avoid the relevant policies for material non-disclosure. The assured, and the lessor of the premises, which was a co-insured under the first of the policies, assigned their causes of action to the claimant, which sued the defendant insurance broker in negligence. The broker was held liable for failing to give the assured adequate advice about its disclosure obligations and failing to disclose to the insurer material facts known to it. However, the assured could only recover damages in respect of one of the policies. In respect of other policy, the defendant’s negligence was not causative of the assured’s loss, because it had not affected the lessor’s claim under the policy. Furthermore, on a balance of probabilities, that policy would in any event not have responded by reason of a breach of condition, for which the broker was not responsible.

Butcher J
[2018] EWHC 2558 (Comm)
Bailii, Judiciary
England and Wales

Insurance

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.625935

Assicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC): CA 13 Nov 2002

Rehearing/Review – Little Difference on Appeal

The appellant asked the Court to reverse a decision on the facts reached in the lower court.
Held: The appeal failed (Majority decision). The court’s approach should be the same whether the case was dealt with as a rehearing or as a review. Tanfern was limited to appeals from interlocutory orders. The judge had seen the witnesses, and his assessment was to be interfered with only with great caution. It was not suggested here that the evidence should be reheard.
To prove inducement the insurer or reinsurer must show that the non-disclosure or misrepresentation was an effective cause of his entering into the contract on the terms on which he did. The judge was correct that ARIG had not shown that, if it had known the full facts, it would not have entered into the contracts or would have taken some other share. There was no basis for the court to interfere with that conclusion.
Ward LJ (dissenting) said: ‘I take the law to be this: if it be established that the representee did not allow the representation to affect his judgment in any way then he could not make it a ground for relief. If on the other hand the representee relied on the misrepresentation, then the representor cannot defeat his claim for relief by showing that there were other more weighty causes which contributed to his decision to enter into the contract. In this field the Court does not allow an examination of the relative importance of contributory causes. In other words, it is sufficient if the representation is a cause even if it is not the cause operating on the mind of the representee when he enters into the contract’.
Ward LJ discussed the difficulties of an appeal court reviewing a trial judges finding of fact, saying: ‘Bearing these matters in mind, the appeal court conducting a review of the trial judge’s decision will not conclude that the decision was wrong simply because it is not the decision the appeal judge would have made had he or she been called upon to make it in the court below. Something more is required than personal unease and something less than perversity has to be established . . I would pose the test for deciding whether a finding of fact was against the evidence to be whether that finding by the trial judge exceeded the generous ambit within which reasonable disagreement about the conclusion to be drawn from the evidence is possible. The difficulty or ease with which that test can be satisfied will depend on the nature of the finding under attack. If the challenge is to the finding of a primary fact, particularly if founded upon an assessment of the credibility of witnesses, then it will be a hard task to overthrow. Where the primary facts are not challenged and the judgment is made from the inferences drawn by the judge from the evidence before him, then the Court of Appeal, which has the power to draw any inference of fact it considers to be justified, may more readily interfere with the evaluation of those facts.’
Clarke LJ said: ‘The approach of the court to any particular case will depend upon the nature of the issues kind of case determined by the judge. This has been recognised recently in, for example, Todd v Adams and Chope (trading as Trelawney Fishing Co) [2002] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 293 and Bessant v South Cone Inc [2002] EWCA Civ 763. In some cases the trial judge will have reached conclusions of primary fact based almost entirely upon the view which he formed of the oral evidence of the witnesses. In most cases, however, the position is more complex. In many such cases the judge will have reached his conclusions of primary fact as a result partly of the view he formed of the oral evidence and partly from an analysis of the documents. In other such cases, the judge will have made findings of primary fact based entirely or almost entirely on the documents. Some findings of primary fact will be the result of direct evidence, whereas others will depend upon inference from direct evidence of such facts.
In appeals against conclusions of primary fact the approach of an appellate court will depend upon the weight to be attached to the findings of the judge and that weight will depend upon the extent to which, as the trial judge, the judge has an advantage over the appellate court; the greater that advantage the more reluctant the appellate court should be to interfere. As I see it, that was the approach of the Court of Appeal on a ‘rehearing’ under the Rules of the Supreme Court and should be its approach on a ‘review’ under the Civil Procedure Rules 1998.
Some conclusions of fact are, however, not conclusions of primary fact of the kind to which I have just referred. They involve an assessment of a number of different factors which have to be weighed against each other. This is sometimes called an evaluation of the facts and is often a matter of degree upon which different judges can legitimately differ. Such cases may be closely analogous to the exercise of a discretion and, in my opinion, appellate courts should approach them in a similar way.
In Todd’s case [2002] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 293, where the question was whether a contract of service existed, Mance LJ drew a distinction between challenges to conclusions of primary fact or inferences from those facts and an evaluation of those facts, as follows, at p 319-320, para 129:
‘With regard to an appeal to this court (which would never have involved a complete rehearing in that sense), the language of ‘review’ may be said to fit most easily into the context of an appeal against the exercise of a discretion, or an appeal where the court of appeal is essentially concerned with the correctness of an exercise of evaluation or judgment-such as a decision by a lower court whether, weighing all relevant factors, a contract of service existed. However, the references in rule 52.11(3)(4) to the power of an appellate court to allow an appeal where the decision below was ‘wrong’ and to ‘draw any inference of fact which it considers justified on the evidence’ indicate that there are other contexts in which the court of appeal must, as previously, make up its own mind as to the correctness or otherwise of a decision, even on matters of fact, by a lower court. Where the correctness of a finding of primary fact or of inference is in issue, it cannot be a matter of simple discretion how an appellate court approaches the matter. Once the appellant has shown a real prospect (justifying permission to appeal) that a finding or inference is wrong, the role of an appellate court is to determine whether or not this is so, giving full weight of course to the advantages enjoyed by any judge of first instance who has heard oral evidence. In the present case, therefore, I consider that (a) it is for us if necessary to make up our own mind about the correctness or otherwise of any findings of primary fact or inferences from primary fact that the judge made or drew and the claimants challenge, while (b) reminding ourselves that, so far as the appeal raises issues of judgment on unchallenged primary findings and inferences, this court ought not to interfere unless it is satisfied that the judge’s conclusion lay outside the bounds within which reasonable disagreement is possible. In relation to (a) we must, as stated, bear in mind the important and well-recognised reluctance of this court to interfere with a trial judge on any finding of primary fact based on the credibility or reliability of oral evidence. In the present case, however, while there was oral evidence, its content was largely uncontentious.’ . . Neuberger J stressed that the question whether there was a contract of service on the facts involved the weighing up of a series of factors. Thorpe LJ agreed with both judgments.’

Ward, Clarke LJJ, Sir Christopher Staighton
Times 29-Nov-2002, Gazette 23-Jan-2003, [2002] EWCA Civ 1642, [2003] 1 WLR 577, [2003] Lloyds Rep IR 131, [2003] 1 All ER (Comm) 140
Bailii
Civil Procedure Rules 52.11
England and Wales
Citing:
ExplainedTanfern Ltd v Cameron-MacDonald, Cameron-MacDonald CA 12-May-2000
The court gave detailed guidance on the application of the new procedures on civil appeals in private law cases introduced on May 2. Appeals from a County Court District Judge’s final decision in a multi-track case could now go straight to the Court . .
CitedIn re Grayan Building Services Ltd CA 1995
The degree to which an appellate court will be willing to substitute its own judgment for that of the tribunal will vary with the nature of the question. Hoffmann LJ said: ‘The concept of limited liability and the sophistication of our corporate law . .
CitedSS Hontestroom v SS Sagaporack HL 1927
The court discussed the weight to be given by an appellate court to findings of fact made by the court of first instance.
Held: Not to have seen the witnesses puts appellate judges in a permanent position of disadvantage as against the trial . .
CitedThe Ikarian Reefer CA 1995
The court reversed the decision of the trial judge that the plaintiff insured shipowners had not deliberately scuttled their vessel or cast her away: ‘(1) The burden of showing that the trial Judge was wrong lies on the appellant . . (2) When . .
CitedAkerhielm v De Mare PC 1959
A company prospectus contained the following: ‘About a third of the capital has already been subscribed in Denmark.’ Though the directors believed this to be true, it was not true at the time the prospectus was issued.
Held: The statement was . .
CitedTodd and Others v Adams and Another CA 18-Apr-2002
The boat owners had failed to comply with the 1975 safety rules, and seamen died. The boat owners relied upon the restriction on damages in the 1995 Act, and the seamen’s families argued that the failure to apply the safety rules removed that . .
CitedBessant and others v South Cone Incorporated; in re REEF Trade Mark CA 28-May-2002
The Reef pop group applied to register ‘REEF’ for Classes 25 and 26 – e.g. T-shirts, badges, etc. South Cone opposed them as registered proprietors of ‘Reef Brazil’ for the footwear which also was included in Class 25. South’s reputation was . .
CitedMehdi Norowzian v Arks Ltd and Guinness Brewing Worldwide Limited (No 2) CA 11-Nov-1999
The claimant film artist showed a film to an advertising agency, who did not make use of it, but later appeared to use techniques and styles displayed in the film in subsequent material sold to third parties.
Held: A film was protected as a . .
CitedSt Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co (UK) Ltd v McConnell Dowell Constructors Ltd CA 1995
The court discussed the general principles as to the meaning of ‘inducement’ in the context of insurance contract.
Held: If the three underwriters who gave evidence had been told the truth, on no view would they have underwritten the insurance . .
CitedJEB Fasteners Ltd v Marks, Bloom and Co CA 1981
Accountants prepared audited accounts knowing that the company was in financial difficulties, and the the accounts would be relied upon by the plaintiffs.
Held: The accountants owed a duty of care to the plaintiffs. They knew that they would . .
CitedSmith v Chadwick HL 1884
Unclear Words Insufficient as Representation
A purchaser claimed to have entered into the contract in reliance on the truth of a misrepresentation by the seller. The plaintiff claimed damages for deceit through having been induced to buy shares in an iron company by false representations in a . .
CitedEdgington v Fitzmaurice CA 7-Mar-1885
False Prospectus – Issuers liable in Deceit
The directors of a company issued a prospectus, falsely stating that the proceeds were to be used to complete alterations to the buildings of the company, to purchase horses and vans and to develop the trade of the company. In fact it was to pay off . .
CitedRedgrave v Hurd CA 1881
The plaintiff, an elderly solicitor wishing to retire, advertised for someone to enter into partnership with him and to buy his house. The defendant responded to the advertisement and negotiations followed, in which the plaintiff stated that the . .
CitedAbrahams v Mediterranean Insurance and Reinsurance Co Ltd 1991
. .
CitedJoyce v Yeomans CA 1981
The court discussed how an appellate court should defer to the assessment of a judge at first instance of the value of an expert witness.
Brandon LJ said: ‘even when dealing with expert witnesses, a trial judge has an advantage over an . .
CitedPan Atlantic Insurance Co Ltd and Another v Pine Top Insurance Co Ltd HL 27-Jul-1994
The plaintiff had written long term (tail) insurance. The defendant came to re-insure it. On a dispute there were shown greater losses than had been disclosed, and that this had been known to the Plaintiff.
Held: ‘material circumstance’ which . .
CitedThe Glannibanta CA 1876
‘Now we feel, as strongly as did the Lords of the Privy Council in the cases just referred to [The Julia 14 Moo P.C. 210 and The Alice L.R. 2 P.C. 245], the great weight that is due to the decision of a judge of first instance whenever, in a . .
CitedNocton v Lord Ashburton HL 1914
The defendant solicitor had persuaded his client to release a charge, thus advancing the solicitor’s own subsequent charge on the same property. The action was started in the Chancery Division of the High Court. The statement of claim alleged fraud . .
CitedBiogen Plc v Medeva Plc HL 31-Oct-1996
The claim patented sought to protect a genetic molecule rather than a whole mouse namely that the molecule would, if inserted into a suitable host cell, cause the cell to make antigens of the Hepatitis B virus. A recombinant method of making the . .

Cited by:
CitedMerer v Fisher and Another CA 13-May-2003
A right of pre-emption had misdescribed the property when it was registered. The land was transferred without regard to the right of pre-emption. It was found as a fact that no money passed for the transfer, and the claimants said the unregistered . .
CitedDP Mann and others v Coutts and Co ComC 16-Sep-2003
The claimants were involved in litigation, They took certain steps on the understanding that the respondents had had deposited with them substantial sums in accounts under binding authorities. The bank had written a letter upon which they claim they . .
CitedSinclair Roche and Temperley (A Firm) v Somatra Ltd (Damages) CA 23-Oct-2003
The ‘Somatra’ was lost at sea. The insurance claim had been refused on the basis that the ship was unseaworthy. The owners came to instruct the appellant solicitors to represent them in the insurance claim. Having lost confidence in the solicitors, . .
CitedNiru Battery Manufacturing Company, Bank Sepah Iran v Milestone Trading Limited CA 23-Oct-2003
The claimant had contracted to purchase lead from some of the defendants. There were delays in payment but when funds were made available they should have been repaid. An incorrect bill of lading was presented. The bill certified that the goods had . .
CitedRowland v The Environment Agency CA 19-Dec-2003
The claimant owned a house by the river Thames at Hedsor Water. Public rights of navigation existed over the Thames from time immemorial, and its management lay with the respondent. Landowners at Hedsor had sought to assert that that stretch was now . .
CitedIS Innovative Software Ltd v Howes CA 19-Feb-2004
It was alleged that the defendant had backdated contracts of employment to a time when he had been employed by the claimant, and had induced staff to leave. The company appealed dismissal of its claim.
Held: The advantage of the court . .
CitedHarding v Wealands CA 17-Dec-2004
The claimant sought damages here for a road traffic accident which had occurred in Australia. The defendant was working in England. The defendant argued that the law of New South Wales applied.
Held: The general rule in section 11 was not to . .
CitedPrecis (521) Plc v William M Mercer Ltd CA 15-Feb-2005
Purchasers of a company sought to claim in negligence against the respondent actuaries in respect of a valuation of the company’s pension funds.
Held: There was a paucity of authority as to when a duty of care was assumed. The words used and . .
CitedBathurst (As Administrator of the Estate of Michael David Bathurst Deceased) v Scarborow CA 1-Apr-2004
The deceased and defendant had been partners and friends. They had bought a property expressly for the partnership and was conveyed into their names as joint tenants.
Held: The declaration in the partnership was not itself sufficient cogent . .
CitedA v Hoare; H v Suffolk County Council, Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs intervening; X and Y v London Borough of Wandsworth CA 12-Apr-2006
Each claimant sought damages for a criminal assault for which the defendant was said to be responsible. Each claim was to be out of the six year limitation period. In the first claim, the proposed defendant had since won a substantial sum from the . .
CitedLondon Borough of Southwark v Kofi-Adu CA 23-Mar-2006
The authority complained that during the course of the trial, the judge had repeatedly intervened during oral evidence.
Held: A judge must be careful not to repeatedly intervene during oral evidence as opposed to counsel making submissions. . .
CitedAIC Ltd v ITS Testing Services (UK) Ltd (‘the Kriti Palm’) CA 28-Nov-2006
The defendant appealed a finding of deceit. Having issued its certificate as to the quality of a cargo of gasoline, it then failed to disclose to the party who had paid it to produce the certificate, information it had which cast doubt on the . .
CitedNorwich Union Insurance Ltd v Meisels and Another QBD 9-Nov-2006
The claimants sought payment for water damage under their policies. The insurer alleged non-disclosure. The judge had found the claimants to be honest, and criticised the defendants witnesses. The claimants had been involved in companies which had . .
ApprovedDatec Electronics Holdings Ltd and others v United Parcels Services Ltd HL 16-May-2007
The defendants had taken on the delivery of a quantity of the claimant’s computers. The equipment reached one depot, but then was lost or stolen. The parties disputed whether the Convention rules applied. UPS said that the claimant had agreed that . .
CitedLondon Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm and Disability Rights Commission CA 25-Jul-2007
The court was asked, whether asked to grant possession against a disabled tenant where the grounds for possession were mandatory. The defendant was a secure tenant with a history of psychiatric disability. He had set out to buy his flat, but the . .
CitedHaw and Another v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court Admn 12-Dec-2007
The defendants appealed convictions for contempt of court, on the basis of having wilfully interrupted the court. The respondent said that no appeal lay.
Held: The statute was ambiguous, and ‘there can be no good reason why a person convicted . .
CitedBarlow Clowes International Ltd and Others v Henwood CA 23-May-2008
The receiver appealed against an order finding that the debtor petitioner was not domiciled here when the order was made. The debtor had a domicile of origin in England, but later acquired on in the Isle of Man. He then acquired a home in Mauritius . .
CitedAli v Birmingham City Council CA 7-Nov-2008
The Council said that it had discharged its duty to house the claimants after they had refused an offer of accommodation, and that decision had been reviewed. The claimant denied receiving a notice under the procedure. The court was asked whether . .
CitedAlford v Cambridgeshire Police CA 24-Feb-2009
The claimant police officer had been held after an accident when he was in a high speed pursuit of a vehicle into the neighbouring respondent’s area. The prosecution had been discontinued, and he now appealed against rejection of his claims for . .
CitedBrennan and others v Sunderland City Council Unison GMB EAT 16-Dec-2008
No Waiver for disclosure of Advice
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Admissibility of evidence
The claimant sought disclosure of certain legal advice on the basis that its effect, and a summary of its contents, had been put before the court and . .
CitedCharania v Harbour Estates Ltd CA 27-Oct-2009
The defendant appealed against the award of the estate agent’s fees, acting under a sole agency agreement. The agreement had been terminated. A buyer who had seen the property first under the agency later returned and negotiated a purchase.
CitedGarratt v Saxby CA 18-Feb-2004
There had been a Part 36 offer to settle the action. It was disclosed inadvertently to the judge.
Held: There had been no serious procedural irregularity, and fairness and justice did not require a rehearing before different judge. . .
CitedHussain v Hussain and Another CA 23-Oct-2012
The claimant appealed against rejection of his claim for damages after a car accident. The defendants argued that the claim was fraudulent. The defendant driver had been involved in other collisions found to be fraudulent. The claimant appealed . .
CitedDresdner Kleinwort Ltd and Another v Attrill and Others CA 26-Apr-2013
The bank appealed against judgment against it on claims by former senior employees for contractual discretionary bonuses.
Held: The appeal failed. The bank’s unilateral promise made within the context of an existing employment relationship to . .
CitedGladman Commercial Properties v Fisher Hargreaves Proctor and Others CA 14-Nov-2013
The claimant appealed against the striking out of his claims for fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation as to the suitability for deveopment of two former fire service properties. The court had said that a settlement with co-tortfeasors operated . .
CitedWhitehead v Bruce and Others CA 21-Mar-2013
The three defendants each appealed against apportionment of liability for serious personal injuries incurred in a road traffic accident. The first defendant a motor cycle driver, with the claimant his pillion passenger took suddent action to evade a . .
CitedHome Office v Lowles CA 29-Jul-2004
The defendant appealed against finding of liability. The claimant, an officer ar Armley Prison had been redirected to a side entrance. There was a ramp, but at the top was a two inch step. The parties had disputed the exact circumstances of the . .
CitedPlevin v Paragon Personal Finance Ltd SC 12-Nov-2014
PPI Sale – No Recovery from Remote Parties
The claimant sought repayment of payment protection insurance premiums paid by her under a policy with Norwich Union. The immediate broker arranging the loan was now insolvent, and she sought repayment from the second and other level intermediaties. . .
CitedFortune and Others v Wiltshire Council and Another CA 20-Mar-2012
The court considered the contnuation of public rights of way against the new system of the ending of certain unrecorded rights.
Held: he appeal failed. ‘As a matter of plain language, section 67(2)(b) does not, in our judgment, require the . .
CitedMichalak v General Medical Council and Others SC 1-Nov-2017
Dr M had successfully challenged her dismissal and recovered damages for unfair dismissal and race discrimination. In the interim, Her employer HA had reported the dismissal to the respondent who continued their proceedings despite the decision in . .
CitedShagang Shipping Company Ltd v HNA Group Company Ltd SC 5-Aug-2020
Allegations had been made that a contract had been procured by bribery. The other party said that the admissions of bribery had been extracted by torture and were inadmissible. The CA had decided that the unproven possibility that it was obtained by . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Civil Procedure Rules, Professional Negligence, Insurance, Litigation Practice

Leading Case

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.178103

Reilly v National Insurance and Guarantee Corporation Ltd: CA 19 Dec 2008

The claimant sold fire extinguishers. Three failed, resulting in damage to the purchaser’s properties. His insurers refused to pay an indemnity saying that the failure was the failure of a piece of machinery (the switchgear) and was not covered by the policy. He appealed against a decision supporting the insurers.
Held: The court re-iterated the principles of construing contracts: ‘a presumption that the words in question should be construed in their ordinary and popular sense; that a commercial document, such as an insurance policy, should be construed in accordance with sound commercial principles and good business sense; that the commercial object of the contract as a whole, or the particular clause in question, will be relevant in resolving any ambiguity in the wording; and that in a case of true ambiguity, the construction which produces the more reasonable result is to be preferred. I would only add by way of comment that difficulty of construction is not the same thing as ambiguity.’ The endorsement was not limited to fire and intruder alarms and any switchgear, control panels and machinery associated with them. The word ‘machinery’ is capable of encompassing a wide range of devices which operate by means of physical movement to perform a particular function. On this basis, the failure of a piston would be a failure of machinery, but a failure in pressure of the master cylinder would not.

Sir Anthony May PQBD, Thomas LJ, Moore-Bick LJ
[2008] EWCA Civ 1460, [2009] Lloyd’s Rep IR 488, [2009] 1 All ER (Comm) 1166
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromReilly v National Insurance and Guarantee Corporation Ltd ComC 11-Apr-2008
. .
CitedAbsalom v TCRU Ltd CA 19-Dec-2005
Longmore LJ discussed the construction of a contract: ‘(i) the aim of the exercise is to ascertain the meaning of the relevant contractual language in the context of the document and against the background to the document. The object of the enquiry . .
CitedThe ‘Arsa’ 1925
The court considered whether an outlet valve in the hull of a shape amounted to ‘machinery’. . .
CitedAktion Maritime Corporation of Liberia v S Kasmas and Brothers Ltd 1987
The parties contracted for the sale of a ship under the Norwegian sale form. The court considered whether the contract was properly cancelled and or novated and whether an anti-corrosion system forming part of the hull was machinery within a . .
CitedAntaios Compania Naviera SA v Salen Rederierna AB (‘the Antaios’) HL 1984
A ship charterer discovered that the bills of lading were incorrect, but delayed withdrawal from the charter for 13 days. They now sought leave to appeal the arbitration award against them.
Held: Though he deprecated extending the use of the . .
CitedLovelidge v Anselm Odling and Sons Ltd 1967
The court was asked whether a flexible revolving drive shaft was ‘machinery’.
Held: A drive shaft connecting an electric motor to a cutting wheel could itself constitute machinery. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Contract

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.278984

Foskett v McKeown and Others: HL 18 May 2000

A property developer using monies which he held on trust to carry out a development instead had mixed those monies with his own in his bank account, and subsequently used those mixed monies to pay premiums on a life assurance policy on his own life, vested in trustees for his children. After his death, the life assurance company paid out on the policy. The beneficiaries of the development monies trust made a proprietary claim to a share in the monies paid out by the life assurance company.
Two groups of innocent parties disputed the rights to a death benefit of about 1m pounds paid by insurers pursuant to a whole life policy. A trustee had misappropriated trust funds and used them in part to pay premiums on life insurance policies for the benefit of his own children.
Held: The misappropriated funds could be traced through the insurance policies into the hands of the beneficiaries of the policies. Where part of the premiums had been paid properly, a mixed fund, akin to a bank account, was created, and the interest was according to the proportions. The interest was a property interest in the fund, and the court had no discretion as to its distribution. There is no rule in English law that in the case of a mixed substitution the beneficiary is confined to a lien. ‘Where a trustee wrongfully uses trust money to provide part of the cost of acquiring an asset, the beneficiary is entitled at his option either to claim a proportionate share of the asset or to enforce a lien upon it to secure his personal claim against the trustee for the amount of the misapplied money. It does not matter whether the trustee mixed the trust money with his own in a single fund before using it to acquire the asset, or made separate payments (whether simultaneously or sequentially) out of the differently owned funds to acquire a single asset.’
Lord Millett said: ‘Following is the process of following the same asset as it moves from hand to hand. Tracing is the process of identifying a new asset as the substitute for the old. Where one asset is exchanged for another, a claimant can elect whether to follow the original asset into the hands of the new owner or to trace its value into the new asset in the hands of the same owner . . Tracing is thus neither a claim nor a remedy. It is merely the process by which a claimant demonstrates what has happened to his property, identifies its proceeds and the persons who have handled or received them, and justifies his claim that the proceeds can properly be regarded as representing his property. Tracing is also distinct from claiming. It identifies the traceable proceeds of the claimants’ property. It enables the claimant to substitute the traceable proceeds for the original asset as the subject matter of his claim. But it does not affect or establish his claim.’
Lord Millett set out the distinction between a claim to enforce property right and a case of unjust enrichment: ‘A plaintiff who brings an action in unjust enrichment must show that the defendant has been enriched at the plaintiff’s expense, for he cannot have been unjustly enriched if he has not been enriched at all. But the plaintiff is not concerned to show that the defendant is in receipt of property belonging beneficially to the plaintiff or its traceable proceeds. The fact that the beneficial ownership of the property has passed to the defendant provides no defence; indeed, it is usually the very fact which founds the claim. Conversely, a plaintiff who brings an action like the present must show that the defendant is in receipt of property which belongs beneficially to him or its traceable proceeds, but he need not show that the defendant has been enriched by its receipt. He may, for example, have paid full value for the property, but he is still required to disgorge it if he received it with notice of the plaintiff’s interest.’
Lord Steyn said: ‘In truth tracing is a process of identifying assets: it belongs to the realm of evidence. It tells us nothing about legal or equitable rights to the assets traced.’

Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Steyn, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Millett
Times 24-May-2000, Gazette 08-Jun-2000, [2000] UKHL 29, [2000] 3 All ER 97, [2000] Lloyd’s Rep IR 627, [2001] 1 AC 102, [2000] WTLR 667, (1999-2000) 2 ITELR 711, [2000] 2 WLR 1299
House of Lords, Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedIn re Diplock’s estate CA 1948
After considering a situation in which trust money had been applied in making alterations to the property of an innocent third party but had not added to the value of the property,
Held: The origin of the equitable rules of tracing were . .
Appeal fromFoskett v McKeown and Others CA 27-Jun-1997
Various people had paid money with the promise of acquiring an interest in land in Portugal. The scheme was fraudulent. The funds had been used to purchase a life/investment policy. The policy was held in trust for the fraudster’s mother but he had . .
CitedIn re Leslie; Leslie v French ChD 1883
The court gave guidance as to the circumstances in which an individual who had paid a premium on a policy belonging to someone else could claim an interest in the policy: ‘In my opinion a lien may be created upon the moneys secured by a policy by . .
CitedIn re Tilley’s Will Trusts ChD 1967
The court considered the rights of a beneficiary to participate in any profit which resulted where a trustee mixed trust money with his own money and then used it to purchase other property. . .
CitedScottish Co-operative Wholesale Society Ltd v Meyer HL 1959
Valuation of Shares on Order for Purchase
The Co-operative Society had formed a 51 per cent-owned subsidiary to manufacture rayon at a time of strict post-war controls. The other shares were owned by two outside directors with skill and experience in the trade. When these directors declined . .
CitedFalcke v Scottish Imperial Insurance Co CA 1886
The owner of a policy of life assurance mortgaged the policy to secure repayment of a loan. Subsequently the owner, now the owner of an equity of redemption in the policy, paid two annual premiums which became due under the policy. The policy was . .
CitedD’Avigdor-Goldsmid v Inland Revenue Commisioners HL 1953
A contingency which makes money payable under a chose cannot affect the proprietary interests in the chose in action and therefore in its proceeds. No fresh beneficial interest in a policy of life assurance accrues or arises on the death of the life . .
CitedSandeman and Sons v Tyzack and Branfoot Steamship Co Ltd HL 1913
The House described the doctrines of English law which are applicable to cases where goods belonging to different owners have become mixed so as to be incapable of either being distinguished or separated: ‘If the mixing has arisen from the fault of . .
CitedEdinburgh Corporation v Lord Advocate HL 1879
Competing claims to a mixed fund were resolved by the application of equitable principles. Funds had been contributed by a benefactor of a hospital for particular trust purposes and had for more than 170 years been held, administered and applied as . .
CitedTrustee of the Property of F C Jones and Sons (A Firm) v Jones CA 13-May-1996
A bankruptcy order was made in 1984. Under the 1914 Act the trustee in bankruptcy got title to all the assets of the bankrupt as of the date of the act of bankruptcy. So, the trustee owned the partnership assets. The wife drew andpound;11,700 out of . .
CitedEl Ajou v Dollar Land Holdings Plc ChD 1995
The tracing of assets into the hands of a third party depends upon a notional charge. There are no inflexible rules. The essential elements of ‘knowing receipt’ are: ‘For this purpose the plaintiff must show, first, a disposal of his assets in . .
CitedMagistrates of Edinburgh v McLaren HL 1881
. .
DisapprovedIn re Hallett’s Estate; Knatchbull v Hallett CA 1880
Where a trustee of a policy used money received from others to make payment of premiums on an insurance policy, they would be entitled to a lien on the policy. Where an asset was acquired exclusively with trust money, the beneficiary could either . .
CitedLupton v White 19-Dec-1808
Whatever alteration of form any property may undergo, the true owner is entitled to seize it in its new shape if he can prove the identity of the original material. . .
CitedJones v De Marchant 1916
A husband wrongfully used 18 beaver skins belonging to his wife together with four skins of his own, to have a fur coat made up which he then gave to his mistress. The wife was held entitled to recover the coat. The mistress knew nothing of the true . .
CitedFrith v Cartland 1865
‘. . . If a man mixes trust funds with his own, the whole will be treated as the trust property, except so far as he may be able to distinguish what is his own.’ . .

Cited by:
Appealed toFoskett v McKeown and Others CA 27-Jun-1997
Various people had paid money with the promise of acquiring an interest in land in Portugal. The scheme was fraudulent. The funds had been used to purchase a life/investment policy. The policy was held in trust for the fraudster’s mother but he had . .
CitedUltraframe (UK) Ltd v Fielding and others ChD 27-Jul-2005
The parties had engaged in a bitter 95 day trial in which allegations of forgery, theft, false accounting, blackmail and arson. A company owning patents and other rights had become insolvent, and the real concern was the destination and ownership of . .
CitedClark v Cutland CA 18-Jun-2003
One director discovered that his co-director had withdrawn substantial sums from the company. . .
CitedBank of Cyprus UK Ltd v Menelaou SC 4-Nov-2015
The bank customers, now appellants, redeemed a mortgage over their property, and the property was transferred to family members, who in turn borrowed from the same lender. A bank employee simply changed the name on the mortgage. This was ineffective . .
CitedScott v Bridge and Others ChD 25-Nov-2020
Claim to recover money and property said to have been transferred by the claimant to the defendants or one or more of them. The money concerned came from a bank account belonging to the claimant. The property concerned consisted of two . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Equity, Trusts

Leading Case

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.80646

AIG Europe Ltd v OC320301 Llp and Others: CA 14 Apr 2016

‘This appeal turns on the true construction of an aggregation clause contained in an insurance policy applicable to all solicitors’ indemnity policies pursuant to the requirement in the Solicitors’ Act 1974 for compulsory liability insurance for solicitors and the Minimum Terms and Conditions (‘MTC’) required to be incorporated into such polices.’
Held: Teare J went too far in saying that the transactions had to be dependent on each other. It accepted a submission for the Law Society as an intervener, that there must be an ‘intrinsic’ relationship between the transactions rather than a relationship with some outside connecting factor, even if that factor was common to the transactions. If the relevant transaction was the payment of money out of an escrow account, which should not have been paid out of that account, what would be ‘intrinsic’ would depend on the circumstances of that payment. The court summarised its interpretation, at para 33, by saying that ‘the true construction of the words ‘in a series of matters or transactions’ is that the matters or transactions have to have an intrinsic relationship with each other, not an extrinsic relationship with a third factor.’ It allowed the appeal and remitted the action to the Commercial Court to determine in accordance with the guidance in its judgment.

Longmore, Kitchin, Vos LJJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 367, [2016] Lloyd’s Rep IR 289, [2017] 1 All ER 143, [2016] 2 All ER (Comm) 1058
Bailii
Solicitors’ Act 1974
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal FromAIG Europe Ltd v OC320301 Llp and Others ComC 14-Aug-2015
The Claimants, AIG Europe Limited, seeks a declaration that certain claims brought by many individuals against a firm of solicitors are to be aggregated and thus considered a single claim for the purposes of a claim brought by the firm of solicitors . .

Cited by:
CitedAIG Europe Ltd v Woodman and Others SC 22-Mar-2017
The parties disputed the effect of a clause aggregating claims for the purposes of limiting an insurer’s liability under professional negligence insurance.
Held: the claims of each group of investors arise from acts or omissions in a series of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Insurance

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.562146

Digital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd and Another v Financial Services Authority: SC 13 Feb 2013

The appellants challenged an order for the dissolution of their company under the 2000 Acts. They had provided warranties for assorted consumer electrical goods which amounted to insurance, but said that they were not required to be registered under the Act since only services in kind were ever provided.
Held: The appeal failed. The fact that certain activities were to be regulated under European law did not prevent the regulation of other associated areas, in this case the issuing of insurance by provision of goods and services only. These were contracts of insurance, and the appellants were not registered.
The First Council Directive had not been intended to be comprehensive, and the list of businesses it scheduled did not restrict the capacity to regulate other actiities. This was acknowledged in its recitals.
The common law which restricted contracts of insurance to those where the detriment suffered by the insurer was strictly financial was displaced by the reuirement to construe UK law to conform with EU law.

Lord Neuberger, President, Lady Hale, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Sumption
[2013] 1 WLR 605, [2013] UKSC 7
Bailii
Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, cial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) Order 2001, First Council Directive 73/239/EEC
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedPhoenix General Insurance Co of Greece SA v Halvanon Insurance Co Ltd ChD 1985
The court was asked to consider preliminary issues concerning facultative obligatory (fac. oblig.) reinsurances of a variety of business. The issues included whether the reinsured was obliged to keep a retention and whether the writing of its . .
At First InstanceRe Digital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd and Others ChD 31-Jan-2011
The Financial Services Authority sought public interest orders for the winding up of three companies selling, it said, extended warranty cover plans without authorisation. The companies said that authorisation was not required, since only services . .
Appeal fromDigital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd v The Financial Services Authority CA 29-Nov-2011
Parties appealed against on order for the winding up of the company. The Authority (FSA) had said that the company which supplied warranties to owners of digital receiver boxes were providing regulated insurance services, but that the companies were . .
CitedPrudential Insurance Co v Inland Revenue Commissioners 1904
Contract for payment of sum on event
The Insurance company provided endowment insurance polices. They disagreed with the Commissioners as to whether these were policies of insurance and thus as to how they fell to be stamped. Life insurance was defined in the 1891 Act as ‘insurance . .
CitedDepartment of Trade and Industry v St Christopher Motorists Association Ltd 1974
The defendant company provided for the hire of a chauffeur if the insured was disqualified from driving.
Held: Contracts of insurance are not confined to contracts for the payment of money, but may include a contract for some benefit . .
CitedPhoenix General Insurance Co of Greece SA v Halvanon Insurance Co Ltd CA 1987
Kerr LJ summarised the aim of the Directives underlying the 1977 Regulations as being to achieve a uniform classification of non-life insurance businesses and of insured risks for the purposes of the supervision of insurers with a view to ensuring . .
CitedMarleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA ECJ 13-Nov-1990
Sympathetic construction of national legislation
LMA OVIEDO sought a declaration that the contracts setting up Commercial International were void (a nullity) since they had been drawn up in order to defraud creditors. Commercial International relied on an EC . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Financial Services, European, Insurance

Leading Case

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.470946

MacCaferri Ltd v Zurich Insurance Plc: ComC 19 Jun 2015

maccafferiCoC201506

The claimant manufacturer challenged a refusal of indemnity from his insurers, the defendants under its product liability policy. An end user consumer had been injured. The insurer said that the claimant had delayed on notifying the possible claim.
Held: The claim succeeded: ‘the likelihood of a claim cannot simply be inferred from the happening of an accident’ and ‘when the accident occurred, there was not at least a fifty per cent chance that a claim against the Claimant would eventuate. There had been an accident. The gun was involved. It was a possibility, but not more, that the accident involved a fault in the gun. But there were other possibilities: a fault in the way in which the gun was used, or no fault at all.’

Knowles CBE J
[2015] EWHC 1708 (Comm)
Bailii
Citing:
CitedLayher Ltd v Lowe and Others CA 8-Jan-1997
The insurers became insolvent, and re-insurers sought to escape liability saying that no sums had been paid out to trigger the re-insurer’s liability.
Held: Re-Insurers were liable under a policy requiring them to pay out on sums paid out by . .
CitedVerelst’s Administratrix v Motor Cross Union Insurance Company Limited 1925
The insured was killed in a motor accident in India on 14 January 1923. Knowledge of her death reached her personal representative in England within a month, but the personal representative did not know of the existence of the insurance policy until . .
CitedJacobs v Coster, Avon Insurance CA 25-Jan-1999
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.549251

Bristol Alliance Ltd v Williams and Another: QBD 1 Jul 2011

bristol_williamsQBD11

The driver had crashed into the insured’s building causing substantial damage. The court was asked which of the driver’s and building’s insurers should bear the costs. The driver’s insurers said that he had acted deliberately and therefore they were not liable. Though they might even so be liable through the Motor Insurers Bureau, the provisions of that scheme would exempt them where, as here, the claim was under subrogation.
Held: The overriding purpose of the compulsory insurance scheme was to protect innocent third parties. The statute and regulations overrode certain kinds of exceptions which an insurer might place in the policy, but a clause against the causing of damage deliberately was not included. The judgment of Laws LJ in Charlton was to be preferred and the word ‘accident’ and its cognates may be construed so as to include the insured’s own criminal or deliberate acts.

Tugendhat J
[2011] EWHC 1657 (QB)
Bailii
Road Traffic Act 1988 151, The Motor Vehicles (Third Party Risks) Regulations 1972
Citing:
CitedBeresford v Royal Insurance Co Ltd HL 1938
The forfeiture rule was to be applied in a case involving suicide. An insured may not recover under a policy of insurance in respect of loss intentionally caused by his own criminal or tortious act, however clearly the wording of the policy may . .
CitedZurich General Accident and Liability Insurance Co Ltd v Morrison 1942
The statutory requirement for compulsory insurance in the Road Traffic Act 1930 was of little value if it was open to insurers to freely exclude liability for common risks. . .
CitedHardy v Motor Insurers’ Bureau CA 1964
The court was asked whether insurance pursuant to the Road Traffic Act 1960 would provide valid cover for the benefit of a third party injured by deliberately criminal conduct on the part of the driver.
Held: Diplock LJ said: ‘The rule of law . .
CitedGardner v Moore HL 1984
The uninsured first defendant deliberately drove a car at the plaintiff who was walking on the pavement, and thus caused serious injuries. The MIB accepted that the trial judge was bound by Hardy to declare that the Bureau was bound to indemnify the . .
CitedChurchill Insurance v Charlton CA 2-Feb-2001
The victim of an unlawful act of a driver off-road sought damages from another driver and his insurers. The insurers refused to pay.
Held: There is a balance to be found between the statutory purpose of compulsory motor insurance and the . .
CitedCriminal proceedings against Ruiz Bernaldez ECJ 28-Mar-1996
Europa In the preliminary-ruling procedure under Article 177 of the Treaty, it is for the national courts alone, before which the proceedings are pending and which must assume responsibility for the judgment to . .
CitedWragg and Another v Partco Group Ltd UGC Ltd CA 1-May-2002
A claim was made against directors of a company involved in a takeover, for failure to make proper disclosure. The case involved also other issues. The defendants appealed against a refusal to strike out the claim.
Held: The rules made . .
CitedEB v France ECHR 30-Sep-2009
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Insurance

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.441423

Motor Oil Hellas (Corinth) Refineries SA v Shipping Corporation of India (The Kanchenjunga): HL 1990

A ship was caught in harbour when an air raid broke out. The master took the ship to sea where it suffered damage.
Held: The shipowners were protected by a war risks clause in the charterparty agreement. As to waiver by election, Lord Goff of Chieveley said: ‘In the present case, we are concerned with an election which may arise in the context of a binding contract, when a state of affairs comes into existence in which one party becomes entitled, either under the terms of the contract or by the general law, to exercise a right, and he has to decide whether or not to do so. His decision, being a matter of choice for him, is called in law an election. Characteristically, this state of affairs arises where the other party has repudiated the contract or has otherwise committed a breach of the contract which entitles the innocent party to bring it to an end, or has made a tender of performance which does not conform to the terms of the contract. .
In all cases, he has in the end to make his election, not as a matter of obligation, but in the sense that, if he does not do so, the time may come when the law takes the decision out of his hands, either by holding him to have elected not to exercise the right which has become available to him, or sometimes by holding him to have elected to exercise it. Instances of this phenomenon are to be found in s. 35 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979. In particular, where with knowledge of the relevant facts a party has acted in a manner which is consistent only with his having chosen one of the two alternative and inconsistent courses of action then open to him – for example, to determine a contract or alternatively to affirm it – he is held to have made his election accordingly . . perhaps because a party who elects not to exercise a right which has become available to him is abandoning that right, he will only be held to have done so if he has so communicated his election to the other party in clear and unequivocal terms Moreover, it does not require consideration to support it, and so it is to be distinguished from an express or implied agreement, such as a variation of the relevant contract, which traditionally requires consideration to render it binding in English Law.’

Lord Goff of Chieveley
Times 19-Feb-1990, [1990] CLY 4077, [1990] 1 Lloyds Rep 391
Sale of Goods Act 1979 35
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedOliver Ashworth (Holdings) Limited v Ballard (Kent) Limited CA 18-Mar-1999
In order for the landlord to claim double rent where a tenant held over unlawfully after the tenancy was determined, the landlord must not do anything to indicate that the lease might be continuing, for example by denying the validity of break . .
CitedPeregrine Systems Ltd v Steria Ltd CA 14-Mar-2005
The claimant provided computer software to the defendants. The defendants appealed dismissal of their defences arguing that the system had failed.
Held: No repudiatory breach was established, and moreover Steria had elected to affirm the . .
CitedStocznia Gdynia Sa v Gearbulk Holdings Ltd CA 13-Feb-2009
Orders were placed for the construction of ships. They were not delivered. The buyer, the defendant, cancelled the orders. The defendants sought the loss of profit. The claimants said they were entitled only to the repayment of instalments. The . .
CitedWheatley, Smith As Executors of Henry Thomas Cadbury-Brown v King LRA 30-Nov-2011
LRA Estoppel – Exercise of options – whether defect waived – ‘The Kanchenjunga’ [1990] Lloyds Law Reports 391 – Peyman v Lanjani [1985] 1 Ch 457, HIH Casualty and General Insurance Ltd v AXA Corporate Solutions . .
ExplainedTele2 International Card Company Sa and others v Post Office Ltd CA 21-Jan-2009
Appeal against rejection of claim for novation of contract.
Held: Aikens LJ summarised the analysis by Lord Goff of the principles of affirmation by election in Kanchenjunga as follows: ‘i) If a contract gives a party a right to terminate upon . .
CitedForce India Formula One Team Ltd v 1 Malaysia Racing Team Sdn Bhd and Others ChD 21-Mar-2012
The claimants alleged misuse by the defendants of confidential information.
Held: Arnold J said: ‘Confidential information is not property, however, even though businessmen often deal with confidential information as if it were property and . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Contract, Equity

Leading Case

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.188152

Macaura v Northern Assurance Company Limited: HL 1925

Macaura owned the large majority of shares in a limited company, trading in timber. The company also owed him substantial sums. He kept on the insurance of timber and other assets within the business but in his own name. When he came to claim, his claim was refused by the insurers.
Held: His appeal failed. An insurable interest in property could only arise where the insured held a legal or equitable interest in the insured property.
Neither a shareholder nor a simple creditor of a company had any insurable interest in any particular asset of the company because as such he had no legal or equitable interest in it.
Lord Buckmaster said: ‘Turning now to his position as shareholder, this must be independent of the extent of his share interest. If he were entitled to insure holding all the shares in the company, each shareholder would be equally entitled, if the shares were all in separate hands. Now, no shareholder has any right to any item of property owned by the company, for he has no legal or equitable interest therein. He is entitled to a share in the profits while the company continues to carry on business and a share in the distribution of the surplus assets when the company is wound up. If he were at liberty to effect an insurance against loss by fire of any item of the company’s property, the extent of his insurable interest could only be measured by determining the extent to which his share in the ultimate distribution would be diminished by the loss of the asset – a calculation almost impossible to make. There is no means by which such an interest can be definitely measured and no standard which can be fixed of the loss against which the contract of insurance could be regarded as an indemnity . . In the present case, though it might be regarded as a moral certainty that the appellant would suffer loss if the timber which constituted the sole asset of the company were destroyed by fire, this moral certainty becomes dissipated and lost if the asset be regarded as only one in an innumerable number of items in a company’s assets and the shareholding interest be spread over a large number of individual shareholders.’ and ‘No shareholder has any right to any item of property owned by the company, for he has no legal or equitable interest therein. He is entitled to a share in the profits while the company continues to carry on business and a share in the distribution of the surplus assets when the company is wound up.’
Lord Sumner also said that the appellant had no insurable interest: ‘It is clear that the appellant had no insurable interest in the timber described . . He had no lien or security over it and, though it lay on his land by his permission, he had no responsibility to its owner for its safety, nor was it there under any contract that enabled him to hold it for his debt. He owned almost all the shares in the company, and the company owed him a good deal of money, but, neither as creditor nor as shareholder, could he insure the company’s assets. The debt was not exposed to fire nor were the shares, and the fact that he was virtually the company’s only creditor, while the timber was its only asset, seems to me to make no difference. He stood in no ‘legal or equitable relation to’ the timber at all. He had no ‘concern in’ the subject insured. His relation was to the company, not its goods, and after the fire he was directly prejudiced by the paucity of the company’s assets, not by the fire.’
Lord Wrenbury said: ‘My Lords, this appeal may be disposed of by saying that the corporator even if he holds all the shares is not the corporation, and that neither he nor any creditor of the company has any property legal or equitable in the assets of the corporation.’

Lord Buckmaster, Lord Wrenbury, Lord Sumner
[1925] AC 619, (1925) 133 LT 152, [1925] All ER 51, [1925] AC 619, [1925] All ER Rep 51, 94 LJPC 154, 133 LT 152, 41 TLR 447, 69 Sol Jo 777, 31 Com Cas 10 HL
England and Wales
Cited by:
DistinguishedSharp v Sphere Drake Insurance plc (The Moonacre) 1992
S, a retired businessman, had bought a vessel and insured it in his name, but registered it in the name of company, R. In the winter, the boat was laid up, but occupied by a workman who maintained it and kept it secure. The boat was destroyed by a . .
CitedFeasey v Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada and Another: Steamship Mutual Underwriting Association (Bermuda) Ltd v Feasey ComC 17-May-2002
The fact that there was more than one insurance policy in place for the same interest would not preclude a claim under one of them. A mutual underwriting group insured members against personal injury and so forth through ‘lineslip’ policies. The . .
CitedBen Hashem v Ali Shayif and Another FD 22-Sep-2008
The court was asked to pierce the veil of incorporation of a company in the course of ancillary relief proceedings in a divorce. H had failed to co-operate with the court.
After a comprehensive review of all the authorities, Munby J said: ‘The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Company

Leading Case

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.184482

Rhesa Shipping Co SA v Edmonds (The Popi M): HL 16 May 1985

The Popi M sank in calm seas and fair weather as a result of a large and sudden entry of water into her engine room through her shell plating. The vessel’s owners claimed against her hull and machinery underwriters, contending that the loss was caused by a peril of the sea or alternatively by crew negligence. The suggested peril of the sea was a moving submerged object, i.e. a submarine. The underwriters contended that the vessel was not seaworthy. More specifically, the underwriters advanced a mechanism for unseaworthiness through wear and tear, based on expert metallurgical evidence. The judge rejected that theory. He also rejected the owners’ argument that there had been crew negligence. That left the possibilities that the vessel was in some other way unseaworthy or that it collided with a submarine. There was no clear basis upon for the court to say that burden of proof had been discharged.
Held: The burden of proving this, on a balance of probabilities, lay on the plaintiffs. A trial judge is not bound to accept the evidence of one side or the other: there remains the possibility of deciding the case on the burden of proof. The court should avoid deciding cases on a balance of improbabilities. It was not possible to proceed on the basis of eliminating the impossible and deciding that the remaining explanation, however improbable, must be the cause, unless all the relevant facts were known; that state of affairs did not exist, as the ship had sunk in deep water. The concept of proof on a balance of probabilities had to be applied with common sense. It required a judge, before he found a particular event occurred, to be satisfied on the evidence that it was more likely to have occurred than not.
(1) where the cause of a past event is in issue and two or more competing causes are advanced the burden of proving his case on causation remains on the claimant throughout, and though the defendant can advance a competing cause there is no obligation on him to prove this case.
(2) Even after a prolonged enquiry with a mass of expert evidence, it is open to the courts to conclude that causation remains in doubt and the result will be that the claimant has failed to discharge the burden of proof.
(3) Therefore the effect of this decision is that where the court considers one theory as improbable but also rules out all other theories the court should not treat the improbable theory as the likely cause of the event.
Lord Brandon of Oakbrook said: ‘the appeal does not raise any question of law, except possibly the question what is meant by proof of a case ‘on a balance of probabilities’. Nor do underwriters challenge . . any of the primary findings of fact made by Bingham J. The question, and the sole question, which your Lordships have to decide is whether on the basis of those primary findings of fact, Bingham J and the Court of Appeal were justified in drawing the inference that the ship was, on the balance of probabilities, lost by perils of the sea.
In approaching this question it is important that two matters should be borne constantly in mind. The first matter is that the burden of proving, on a balance of probabilities, that the ship was lost by perils of the seas is and remains throughout on the shipowners. Although it is open to the underwriters to suggest and seek to prove some other cause of loss, against which the ship was not insured, there is no obligation on them to do so. Moreover, if they chose to do so, there is no obligation on them to prove, even on a balance of probabilities, the truth of their alternative case.
The second matter is that it is always open to a court, even after the kind of prolonged inquiry with a mass of expert evidence which took place in this case, to conclude, at the end of the day, that the proximate cause of the ship’s loss, even on a balance of probabilities, remains in doubt, with the consequence that the shipowners have failed to discharge the burden of proof which lay on them.’
As to the Sherlock Holmes fallacy that ‘once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, is the truth ‘: ‘In my view there are three reasons why it is inappropriate to apply the dictum of Mr. Sherlock Holmes, to which I have just referred, to the process of fact-finding which a Judge of first instance has to perform at the conclusion of a case of the kind here concerned.
The first reason is one which I have already sought to emphasize as being of great importance, namely, that the Judge is not bound always to make a finding one way or the other with regard to the facts averred by the parties. He has open to him the third alternative of saying that the party on whom the burden of proof lies in relation to any averment made by him has failed to discharge that burden. No judge likes to decide cases on burden of proof if he can legitimately avoid having to do so. There are cases, however, in which, owing to the unsatisfactory state of the evidence or otherwise, deciding on the burden of proof is the only just course for him to take.
The second reason is that the dictum can only apply when all relevant facts are known, so that all possible explanations, except a single extremely improbable one, can properly be eliminated.
The third reason is that the legal concept of proof of a case on a balance of probabilities must be applied with common sense. It requires a judge of first instance, before he finds that a particular event occurred, to be satisfied on the evidence that it is more likely to have occurred than not. If such a Judge concludes, on a whole series of cogent grounds, that the occurrence of an event is extremely improbable, a finding by him that it is nevertheless more likely to have occurred than not, does not accord with common sense. This is especially so when it is open to the Judge to say simply that the evidence leaves him in doubt whether the event occurred or not, and that the party on whom the burden of proving that the event occurred lies has therefore failed to discharge such burden.

In my opinion Bingham J adopted an erroneous approach to this case by regarding himself as compelled to choose between two theories, both of which he regarded as extremely improbable, or one of which he regarded as extremely improbable and the other of which he regarded as virtually impossible. He should have borne in mind, and considered carefully in his judgment, the third alternative which was open to him, namely, that the evidence left him in doubt as to the cause of the aperture in the ship’s hull, and that, in these circumstances, the shipowners had failed to discharge the burden of proof which was on them.’

Lord Brandon of Oakbrook
[1985] 2 All ER 712, [1985] 1 WLR 948, [1985] 2 Lloyds Rep 1, [1985] UKHL 15
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
At First InstanceThe Popi M; Rhesa Shipping Co SA v Edmonds 1983
The parties disputed the cause of the loss of a ship. The experts suggested different but improbably explanations; each supported as the most likely explanation only because any other hypothesis was regarded as almost (if not altogether) impossible. . .
ApprovedLa Compania Martiartu v Royal Exchange Assurance Corporation CA 1923
The court found, on limited evidence, that the ship in respect of which her owners had claimed for a total loss of perils by sea, had in fact been scuttled with the connivance of those owners.
Scrutton LJ said: ‘This view renders it . .

Cited by:
CitedGibbs and others v Rea PC 29-Jan-1998
(Cayman Islands) The respondent worked for a bank. He disclosed a business interest, but that interest grew in importance to the point where he resigned in circumstances amounting to constructive dismissal. His home and business officers were raided . .
CitedMoiz Ahmed Siddiqui, Ishrat Siddiqui/Bhajan Singh Sohanpal v Council of the London Borough of Hillingdon TCC 15-Apr-2003
The claimants sought damages for cracks in their house caused by the roots of trees on the defendant’s land.
Held: The claimants had failed to establish by evidence that the tree roots were the cause of the damage. The claim failed. . .
CitedUCB Group Ltd v Hedworth CA 4-Dec-2003
The defendant challenged the claimant’s right to possession under a legal charge. She appealed a finding that she had not established the undue influence of her husband, a solicitor.
Held: A lender who received a voidable security was entitled . .
CitedExel Logistics Ltd v Curran and others CA 30-Sep-2004
The claimants sought damages for personal injuries after a crash in a Land Rover maintained by the defendants. The defendants appealed findings of negligence in failing properly to inflate the rear tyres, in continuing despite the danger, and poor . .
CitedStephens and Another v Cannon and Another CA 14-Mar-2005
The claimants had purchased land from the defendants. The contract was conditional on a development which did not take place. The master had been presented with very different valuations of the property.
Held: The master was not entitled to . .
CitedFlannery and Another v Halifax Estate Agencies Ltd, Trading As Colleys Professional Services CA 18-Feb-1999
A judge at first instance taking a view on an expert’s report should give reasons in his judgment for that view. On appeal, where no reasons had been given, he should be asked to provide reasons by affidavit for the appeal. An inadequately reasoned . .
CitedMcTear v Imperial Tobacco Ltd OHCS 31-May-2005
The pursuer sought damages after her husband’s death from lung cancer. She said that the defenders were negligent in having continued to sell him cigarettes knowing that they would cause this.
Held: The action failed. The plaintiff had not . .
CitedCarisbrooke Shipping Cv5 v Bird Port Ltd ComC 13-Sep-2005
. .
CitedUltraframe (UK) Ltd v Fielding and others ChD 27-Jul-2005
The parties had engaged in a bitter 95 day trial in which allegations of forgery, theft, false accounting, blackmail and arson. A company owning patents and other rights had become insolvent, and the real concern was the destination and ownership of . .
CitedKastor Navigation Co Ltd and Another v AGF M A T and others (‘Kastor Too’) ComC 4-Dec-2002
The claimant ship owner and its mortgagee sued the defendant insurer after the loss of the insured vessel, through fire. The insurers replied that the damage by fire was so extensive that the vessel was beyond repair when she sank, and was therefore . .
CitedHill Street Services Company Ltd v National Westminster Bank Plc and Burjor Mistry ChD 19-Oct-2007
The claimant company said that the bank had allowed money to be removed from its account without authority. Originally it said the second defendant, its former director had authrised the payments. On the second defendant denying this, the company . .
ExplainedIde v ATB Sales Ltd and Another CA 28-Apr-2008
Each appellant challenged how the judge had decided between alternative proofs of causation of the respective loss. In Ide, the claimant asserted a fault in a cycle handlebar, and in Lexus, the claimant asserted that it caught fire whilst . .
CitedFosse Motor Engineers Ltd and others v Conde Nast and National Magazine Distributors Ltd and Another TCC 20-Aug-2008
The claimant said that the defendant’s employees had negligently started a fire which burned down the claimant’s warehouse. There was limited evidence to establish the cause.
Held: The claim failed. The scientific evidence did not point to any . .
CitedPiper v Hales QBD 18-Jan-2013
The claimant owned a very vauable vintage Porsche racing car. It was hired to the defendant. The car suffered severe mechanical damage whilst being driven, and the insurers declined liability.
Held: The Defendant as hirer was under an . .
CitedNulty and Others v Milton Keynes Borough Council CA 24-Jan-2013
There had been two fires at a depot owned by the claimants. The fires were found to have been likely to have been caused by the deceased employee. His insurers had repudiated liability saying that the had not been notified oin a timely fashion.
CitedMilton Keynes Borough Council v Nulty and Others TCC 3-Nov-2011
There had been two fires at depots owned by the claimants. They brought proceedings against an employee, but his insurers repudiated liability saying that they had not been promptly notfied of the claim.
Held: The first fire was caused either . .
CitedLove v Halfords Ltd QBD 8-Apr-2014
The claimant had purchased a new bicycle from the defendants who also maintained it. Several months later, the steerer tube broke causing an accident and severe injury. The cycle had been finally assembled by the defendant after importation, but . .
CitedThe Worshipful Company of Grocers v Keltbray Group Holdings Ltd and Another QBD 19-May-2016
Allegation that a collapse in a nearby building caused a water leak in the claimant’s nearby building.
Held: the effects of the collapse did not cause the major cracking at Grocers’ Hall which was reported on following the flood. The Grocers . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Damages, Insurance, Evidence

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.184697

AJ Building and Plastering Ltd v Turner and Others: QBD 11 Mar 2013

An insurance company had engaged a main contractor to handle repairs to houses insured under its policies. The contractor had engaged the claimant subcontractor to carry out the works at the defendants’ homes, but then went into insolvent liquidation before the works were paid for. The claimant now sought payment direct from the insured. The defendants denied any contract with the claimant, despite mandates signed by them.
Held: The claims failed. It was both a perfectly possible reading of the mandate and far more consonant with the commercial common sense of the situation to interpret it to mean that, although the insurer will be responsible for paying the cost of the insured losses, the householder will remain liable for all other costs, namely the policy excess and any works not covered by the insurance.
The court considered the possible application of the contra preferentem rule: ‘The fact that the contra proferentem rule is a matter of common law whereas regulation 7 (2) is a creature of statute is no reason to differentiate between their applications; the 1999 Regulations give wholesale effect to a European Directive and it is unnecessary to suppose that they were intended to affect the common law relating to contractual interpretation. The occasions on which the principle of construction and the common-law rule apply are the same: their operation is limited to cases of genuine interpretative doubt or ambiguity’
The contracts were to be determined on the standard rules for construction. If the terms were unambiguous then the 1999 Regulation had no application, and ‘ it is impermissible to prejudge the construction of the mandates by presupposing an analysis that ignores them. The mandates were in fact signed. A common reason for having written express contracts is to impose and assume liabilities that would not otherwise be implied.’

Keyser QC J
[2013] EWHC 484 (QB)
Bailii
Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 7
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedInvestors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society HL 19-Jun-1997
Account taken of circumstances wihout ambiguity
The respondent gave advice on home income plans. The individual claimants had assigned their initial claims to the scheme, but later sought also to have their mortgages in favour of the respondent set aside.
Held: Investors having once . .
CitedChartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd and Others HL 1-Jul-2009
Mutual Knowledge admissible to construe contract
The parties had entered into a development contract in respect of a site in Wandsworth, under which balancing compensation was to be paid. They disagreed as to its calculation. Persimmon sought rectification to reflect the negotiations.
Held: . .
CitedSt Edmundsbury and Ipswich Diocesan Board of Finance v Clark (No.2) CA 1973
When looking at a contract ‘one must construe the document according to the natural meaning of the words contained in the document as a whole, read in the light of surrounding circumstances.’
The contra preferetem rule can only come into play . .
CitedMira Oil Resources of Tortola v Bocimar NV ChD 1999
Colman J discussed the application of the contra preferentem rule: ‘Further, this is not a case where the meaning of the words is so finely balanced that the contra proferentum rule should be applied in favour of the owners. If in the view of the . .
CitedAssociation of British Travel Agents Ltd v British Airways Plc CA 2000
Sedley LJ described the common-law rule of contra preferentem, that any doubt as to the meaning of contractual words will be resolved by construing them against the party that put them forward, as ‘a principle not only of law but of justice’ and . .
ApprovedThe Financial Services Authority v Asset L I Inc and Others ChD 8-Feb-2013
The court was asked whether so-called ‘land-banking’ schemes were ‘collective investments schemes’ within section 235.
Held: Andrew Smith J discussed the difference in effect between the contra preferentem rule, and regulation 7 of the 1999 . .
CitedRainy Sky Sa and Others v Kookmin Bank SC 2-Nov-2011
Commercial Sense Used to Interpret Contract
The Court was asked as to the role of commercial good sense in the construction of a term in a contract which was open to alternative interpretations.
Held: The appeal succeeded. In such a case the court should adopt the more, rather than the . .
CitedPink Floyd Music Ltd and Another v EMI Records Ltd CA 14-Dec-2010
The defendant appealed against an order made on the claimant’s assertion that there were due to it substantial underpayments of royalties over many years. The issues were as to the construction of licensing agreements particularly in the context of . .
CitedDirect Travel Insurance v McGeown CA 12-Nov-2003
The contra proferentem interpretation rule is to be invoked only in cases of genuine doubt or ambiguity. Auld LJ said: ‘A court should be wary of starting its analysis by finding an ambiguity by reference to the words in question looked at on their . .
CitedDu Plessis v Fontgary Leisure Parks Ltd CA 2-Apr-2012
The claimant, who owned a holiday mobile home on the respondent’s site challenged the raising of site fees, saying that the contract was unfair. Previously all site fees were equal within the site, but the respondent had introduced a scheme which . .
CitedBrown and Davis Ltd v Galbraith CA 1972
The defendant’s car was damaged in a collision. It was taken to the plaintiff’s garage for repair. The defendant’s insurers contracted with the defendant to pay for the repairs for a specified amount. The plaintiff carried out repair work, and the . .
CitedCurtis v Chemical Cleaning and Dyeing Co CA 1951
The defendant sought to rely on an exemption clause in its garment cleaning contract. The defendant’ shop assistant had said that it extended only to damage to beads and sequins, whereas by its terms it covered all liability for damage to articles . .
CitedAmalgamated Investment and Property Co Ltd (in Liq) v Texas Commerce International Bank Ltd CA 1982
The court explained the nature of an estoppel by convention.
Lord Denning MR said: ‘The doctrine of estoppel is one of the most flexible and useful in the armoury of the law. But it has become overloaded with cases. That is why I have not gone . .
CitedPeekay Intermark Ltd v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd CA 6-Apr-2006
Moore-Bick LJ discussed whether the court should give effect to a non-reliance clause in a contract saying: ‘It is common to include in certain kinds of contracts an express acknowledgement by each of the parties that they have not been induced to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Insurance, Consumer

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.471743

Litaksa UAB v BTA Insurance Company SE: ECJ 26 Mar 2015

Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Compulsory insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles – Directive 90/232/EEC – Article 2 – Differentiation in the amount of the insurance premium depending on the territory in which the vehicle is used

L. Bay Larsen, P
C-556/13, [2015] EUECJ C-556/13, ECLI:EU:C:2015:202
Bailii
Directive 90/232/EEC 2
European

Road Traffic, Insurance

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.545366

Lim (An Infant) v Walia: CA 29 Jul 2014

The parties disputed a claim under the 1975 Act. Immediately before her death, the deceased had, because of her medical condition, a vested right to bring forward an insurance benefit, but that right had ceased upon her death. The court had found that the sum available was part of the estate for the purposes of the 1975 Act. The policy was a joint-life furst death policy. Thr 1975 Act referred to the value of the estate immediately before the death.
Held: The appeal succeeded (McCombe LJ dissenting). Section 9 asked two questions: did she have a severable interest in the terminal illness benefit, and what was that value immediately before her death. The policy made no provision for the advanced benefit to be paid to one only of the insured lives. The deceased had a severable interest which remained contingent until a claim was made. Under section 9(1) the valuation of a severable interest should take into account the imminence of death. The valuation should take into account events occurring after the date at which valuation was to occur. Because no claim had been made the value immediately before the death was nil.

Ardn, McFarlane, McCombe LJJ
[2014] EWCA Civ 1076, [2014] WLR(D) 339
Bailii, WLRD
Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromLim and Others v Walia ChD 26-Sep-2012
The court was asked: ‘where the proceeds of a fixed term joint life policy are paid over as the result of the death of the first of the joint lives insured, but in circumstances where it is to be assumed that the payment of the sum insured might . .
CitedPowell v Osbourne CA 1993
The deceased had separated from his wife and was cohabiting with Miss Osbourne. The deceased and Miss Osbourne purchased a property as joint tenants, with the assistance of a mortgage. The purchase price had been andpound;91,000 and the mortgage was . .
CitedMurphy (By Her Litigation Friend Stockmont) v Holland CA 19-Dec-2003
A married couple had taken out an insurance policy on their joint lives. The policy was maintained after they divorced. On his death, his child by the later marriage claimed a share in the policy under the 1975 Act.
Held: (Chadwick LJ . .
CitedDingmar v Dingmar CA 12-Jul-2006
A house was held upon joint tenancy between the deceased and one of his sons. The transfer into joint names took effect just before the deceased married the claimant. They lived at the property with her children. Seven years after the death, the son . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate, Family, Insurance

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.535401

Thomson v Weems: HL 1884

Where a basis of the contract clause makes the correctness or completeness of the insured’s disclosure into a warranty, a breach of that warranty has the effect that the insurance cover never attaches under the contract.
Lord Blackburn said: ‘In policies of marine insurance I think it is settled by authority that any statement of a fact bearing upon the risk introduced into the written policy is, by whatever words and in whatever place, to be construed as a warranty, and prima facie, at least that the compliance with that warranty is a condition precedent to the attachment of the risk.’

Lord Blackburn
[1884] 9 AC 671
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedF L Schuler AG v Wickman Machine Tools Sales Limited HL 4-Apr-1973
The parties entered an agreement to distribute and sell goods in the UK. They disagreed as to the meaning of a term governing the termination of the distributorship.
Held: The court can not take into account the post-contractual conduct or . .
CitedBank of Nova Scotia v Hellenic Mutual War Risks Association (Bermuda) Ltd (The Good Luck) HL 1992
The effect of breach of an insurance warranty is automatic, rather than dependant on any acceptance or election.
Lord Goff of Chieveley said: ‘So it is laid down in section 33(3) that, subject to any express provision in the policy, the insurer . .
CitedBrit Syndicates Ltd and others v Italaudit Spa and others HL 12-Mar-2008
The parties disputed the extent of cover under an insurance policy. The insured firm of accountants had failed to verify the existence of a substantial balance claimed by the company it audited. The policy ‘included as an Assured Firm but solely in . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.251140

Philip Owen Lloyd-Wolper v Robert Moore; National Insurance Guarantee Corporation Plc, Charles Moore: CA 22 Jun 2004

The first defendant drove a car belonging to his father and insured by his father. The father consented to the driving but under a mistaken belief that his son was licensed. The claimant was injured by the defendant in a road traffic accident.
Held: For insurance purposes, the father could validly permit the driving when under a mistake. A permission which would arise only subject to and upon the fulfillment of a condition was not a permission until that condition was fulfilled, but a permission given did not cease to be one only such for mistake. There was no relevance in different kinds of mistake.
Pill LJ said: ‘permission does not cease to be permission for the purposes of the statute because, in good faith, the person giving it believes that the person to whom it is given is covered by the policy when in fact the person is not.’

Lord Justice Pill, Lord Justice Rix
[2004] EWCA Civ 766, Times 06-Aug-2004, [2004] 3 All ER 741, [2004] 1 WLR 2350
Bailii
Road Traffic Act 1988 151
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedNewbury v Davis QBD 1974
newbury_davisQBD1974
The owner of a vehicle agreed to lend it to someone else on condition that that person insured against third party risks. In the owner’s absence, that person drove the car on a road without insurance.
Held: The appeal against conviction was . .
CitedFerrymasters Ltd v Adams 1980
Employers were alleged to have caused or permitted an employee to drive a vehicle on the road while not holding a driving licence authorising him to do so. When the employee had entered the employment, the employers had ensured that he held a valid . .
CitedBaugh v Crago QBD 1975
The defendant believed that a driver was the holder of a driving licence and permitted him to use the vehicle, when the driver was not in fact such a holder. The prosecutor appealed his acquittal.
Held: Considering Newbury v Davis. The . .
CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Fisher QBD 1992
F was asked to lend L a car. F knew L was disqualified, but agreed provided L found an insured driver with a full valid driving licence. F did not know who L would ask or that he in fact asked R to drive; R was employed as delivery driver and the . .
CitedMonk v Warbey CA 1935
The court took a strict view of a vehicle owner’s potential liability to injured third parties.
Held: A person who suffered injury by reason of a breach of s35 could maintain an action in damages for that breach: ‘The Road Traffic Act, 1930, . .
CitedLyons v May 1948
A person who was ignorant of the fact that there was no policy of insurance covering a vehicle may be guilty of an offence if he permits the use of the vehicles while uninsured. . .

Cited by:
CitedChurchill Insurance Company Ltd v Wilkinson and Others CA 19-May-2010
The various insured defendants had been driven in the insured vehicles by a non-insured driver. Suffering injury at the negligence of the driver, they recovered variously damages. Their insurance companies sought recovery of the sums paid from their . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Road Traffic, Personal Injury

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.198301

Cavell USA, Inc and Randall v Seaton Insurance Company etc: CA 16 Dec 2009

The parties had settled terms for concluding business arrangements between them. The agreement released and referred all claims in law and in equity ‘save for fraud’ to the UK courts. The respondents now wanted to bring a case alleging breach of a contractual or fiduciary duty, and to bring the case in the US, saying that as the claims amounted to fraud, and were there excluded from the jurisdiction provision. The claimants sought an order to prevent them.
Held: The concept of dishonesty was not an essential element of a fraud. Looking at the contract, any claim for fraud was to be brught in England. The judge had incorrectly conflated ‘claims in fraud’ and ‘in the case of fraud’. This narrowed down the the phraseology of the release. The word ‘fraud’ did not require as an essential element an allegation of dishonesty. The document was an international commercial one, and it would be wrong to import too narrow a meaning: ‘in the commercial context of this case the concept of ‘fraud’ is wider than the concept of the tort of deceit where a fraudulent misrepresentation (or equivalent) is required.’

Mummery, Longmore, Toulson LJ
[2009] EWCA Civ 1363, Times 12-Jan-2010, [2010] Lloyd’s Rep FC 197, [2009] 2 CLC 991
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromCavell USA Inc and Another v Seaton Insurance Company and Another ComC 11-Dec-2008
The court gave preliminary rulings as to the meanings on a term sheet signed by both parties which set out arrangements for the termination of other agreements between them. The sheet had released the second defendant from all claims ‘whether in law . .
CitedReddaway and Co Ltd v Banham and Co Ltd HL 1896
The plaintiff manufactured and sold Camel Hair Belting. The defendant also began to sell belting made of camel’s hair in the name of Camel Hair Belting. The trader claimed a right in the term ‘Camel Hair’.
Held: The term was descriptive. Where . .
CitedSatyam Computer Services Ltd v Upaid Systems Ltd CA 9-May-2008
The parties had settled their action, but the claimant now wished to assert that the compromise was based on a concealed fraud. The defendant argued that the agreement precluded re-opening the case.
Held: It was only by the clearest of words . .
CitedWelham v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1961
The House considered what was required to establish an ‘intent to defraud’.
Held: Lord Radcliffe said: ‘Now, I think that there are one or two things that can be said with confidence about the meaning of this word ‘ defraud ‘. It requires a . .
CitedBarclays Bank v Cole CA 1966
There was a bank robbery and the robber had paid in part of the stolen proceeds into another branch of the same bank and the bank sued the robber to recover the stolen monies after the robber had been convicted of robbery and the robber had claimed . .
CitedArmitage v Nurse; etc CA 19-Mar-1997
A clause in a trust deed may validly excuse trustees from personal liability for even gross negligence. The trustee was exempted from liability for loss or damage ‘unless such loss or damage shall be caused by his own actual fraud’.
Held: The . .
CitedKensington International Ltd v Republic of Congo CA 7-Nov-2007
The defendants appealed against orders requiring them to disclose documents in an action regarding the payment of bribes, saying that the requirement effectively required them to incriminate themselves.
Held: The appeal failed. The public . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Torts – Other

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.384147

HIH Casualty and General Insurance Limited v New Hampshire Insurance Company Independent Insurance Company Limited Axa Reinsurance S A: CA 21 May 2001

A claim was made under a re-insurance policy which supported film finances. The re-insurers resisted the claim on the grounds of misrepresentation. Rix LJ: ‘In principle it would seem to me that it is always admissible to look at prior contracts as part of the matrix or surrounding circumstances of a later contract. I do not see how the parol evidence rule can exclude prior contracts, as distinct from mere negotiations. The difficulty of course is that, where the later contract is intended to supersede the prior contract, it may in the generality of cases simply be useless to try to construe the later contract by reference to the earlier one. . Where, however, it is not even common ground that the later contract is intended to supersede the earlier contract, I do not see how it can ever be permissible to exclude reference to the earlier contract.’

Lord Justice Aldous Lord Justice Rix and Mr Justice Lloyd
[2001] EWCA Civ 735, [2001] 2 Lloyds Rep 161, [2001] LLR IR 224
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
See alsoHIH Casualty And General Insurance Limited and Others v The Chase Manhattan Bank and Others CA 31-Jul-2001
Parties syndicating finance for a film obtained the security of an insurance which is designed to pay up to the sum insured, if the revenues generated by the film were insufficient to repay the loan finance plus associated expenses. The polices were . .

Cited by:
CitedAmiri Flight Authority v BAE Systems Plc CA 17-Oct-2003
The appellant had contracted to purchase maintenance from the defendant of aircraft it had also purchased from them. They sought damages for negligence, saying the defendants had failed to prevent a known risk of corrosion. The defendants argued . .
See alsoHIH Casualty And General Insurance Limited and Others v The Chase Manhattan Bank and Others CA 31-Jul-2001
Parties syndicating finance for a film obtained the security of an insurance which is designed to pay up to the sum insured, if the revenues generated by the film were insufficient to repay the loan finance plus associated expenses. The polices were . .
CitedTaylor v Rive Droite Music Ltd ChD 6-Jul-2004
The claimant music producer and songwriter had entered into a publishers agreement with the defendant, agreeing to work for it. He now sought to be free to work for another company. The factual background was unclear, and the contract documentation . .
CitedLimit (No 3) Ltd and others v PDV Insurance Company CA 11-Apr-2005
There had been substantial oil leaks in Venezuela, which had been insured and then re-insured in London. Permission had been given to serve the defendant out of the jurisdiction, but that permission had been set aside. The claimant now appealed.
CitedKPMG Llp v Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd ChD 31-Jan-2006
. .
CitedCrown Estate Commissioners v Roberts and Another ChD 13-Jun-2008
The defendant claimed ownership as Lord Marcher of St Davids of historical rights in foreshores in Pembrokeshire. The claimants sought removal of his cautions against first registration.
Held: Lewison J explored the history of manorial . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Contract

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.147555

Cleaver v Mutual Reserve Fund Life Association: CA 1892

The deceased’s executors objected to his widow maintaining action on a trust created by an insurance policy in her favour under the Act. She had been convicted of his murder. The executors’ case was that ‘it is against public policy to allow a criminal to claim any benefit by virtue of his crime.’
Held: The trust for the wife failed, because she had murdered her husband, but that the policy still was an asset of his estate, and the company had to pay the executors.
Fry LJ said: ‘The principle of public policy invoked is in my opinion rightly asserted. It appears to me that no system of jurisprudence can with reason include amongst the rights which it enforces rights directly resulting to the person asserting them from the crime of that person. If no action can arise from fraud it seems impossible to suppose that it can arise from felony or misdemeanour . . This principle of public policy, like all such principles, must be applied to all cases to which it can be applied without reference to the particular character of the right asserted or the form of its assertion.’ and ‘In the construction of Acts of Parliament . . general words which might include cases obnoxious to this principle (of public policy) must be read and construed subject to it.’

Fry LJ
[1892] 1 QB 147, 1891 4 All ER 335, 61 LJQB 128, 65 LT 220
Married Women’s Property Act 1882 11
England and Wales
Cited by:
AppliedDavitt v Titcumb ChD 1989
The defendant bought a house in joint names with the deceased, but was subsequently convicted of her murder. The house was purchased with the assistance of an endowment life policy in their joint names. Whilst he was imprisoned, the policy was used . .
CitedDunbar (As Administrator of Tony Dunbar Deceased) v Plant CA 23-Jul-1997
The couple had decided on a suicide pact. They made repeated attempts, resulting in his death. Property had been held in joint names. The deceased’s father asked the court to apply the 1982 Act to disentitle Miss Plant.
Held: The appeal was . .
CitedTroja v Troja 1994
(New South Wales) The court explained the application of the forfeiture rules in cases involving murder. Historically: ‘In a time of attainder, forfeiture, and common exaction of the death penalty following conviction for murder, the niceties of the . .
CitedJ v S T (Formerly J) CA 21-Nov-1996
The parties had married, but the male partner was a transsexual, having been born female and having undergone treatment for Gender Identity Dysphoria. After IVF treatment, the couple had a child. As the marriage broke down the truth was revealed in . .
CitedBeresford v Royal Insurance Co Ltd HL 1938
The forfeiture rule was to be applied in a case involving suicide. An insured may not recover under a policy of insurance in respect of loss intentionally caused by his own criminal or tortious act, however clearly the wording of the policy may . .
CitedCommissioner of Police for the Metropolis v Reeves (Joint Administratix of The Estate of Martin Lynch, Deceased) HL 11-Feb-1999
The deceased was a prisoner known to be at risk of committing suicide. Whilst in police custody he hanged himself in his prison cell. The Commissioner accepted that he was in breach of his duty of care to the deceased, but not that that breach was . .
CitedSecretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another v Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council SC 6-Apr-2011
The land-owner had planning permission to erect a barn, conditional on its use for agricultural purposes. He built inside it a house and lived there from 2002. In 2006. He then applied for a certificate of lawful use. The inspector allowed it, and . .
CitedChallen v Challen and Another ChD 27-May-2020
Forfeiture rule disapplied after spousal abuse
The claimant sought the disapplication of the forfeiture rule. She had been convicted of the manslaughter of her seriously abusive husband. The court considered whether a conviction for murder set aside and replaced with one of manslaughter was a . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Wills and Probate

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.185187

Keeley (Widow of Terence Noel James Keeley Deceased) v Pashen and Wren Motor Syndicate 1202 at Lloyd’s: CA 10 Nov 2004

The driver had driven his car at a crowd of people intending to frighten them. Instead one had been killed. The insurers resisted liability saying that the use of the car for this purpose and as it was being used as a taxi, was not use for social domestic or pleasure purposes.
Held: The court should look to the essential character of the journey. The incident took place after he had finished his last fare of the evening. At that time he was merely returning home and driving within the terms of the policy.

Lord Justice Brooke Lord Justice Keene Lord Justice Parker The Vice President Of The Court Of Appeal (Civil Division)
[2004] EWCA Civ 1491, Times 17-Nov-2004, [2005] 1 WLR 1226
Bailii
Road Traffic Act 1988 151
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedGardner v Moore HL 1984
The uninsured first defendant deliberately drove a car at the plaintiff who was walking on the pavement, and thus caused serious injuries. The MIB accepted that the trial judge was bound by Hardy to declare that the Bureau was bound to indemnify the . .
CitedHardy v Motor Insurers’ Bureau CA 1964
The court was asked whether insurance pursuant to the Road Traffic Act 1960 would provide valid cover for the benefit of a third party injured by deliberately criminal conduct on the part of the driver.
Held: Diplock LJ said: ‘The rule of law . .
CitedSeddon v Binions CA 1978
The Court gave guidance on the proper method of interpreting a term of a motor insurance policy which defines the limitations of use subject to which the policy provides cover. Roskill LJ: ‘Inevitably, where one has a phrase such as ‘social, . .
CitedCaple v Sewell and others CA 9-Nov-2001
. .
CitedBeresford v Royal Insurance Co Ltd HL 1938
The forfeiture rule was to be applied in a case involving suicide. An insured may not recover under a policy of insurance in respect of loss intentionally caused by his own criminal or tortious act, however clearly the wording of the policy may . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Insurance, Personal Injury

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.219335

White v White and The Motor Insurers Bureau: HL 1 Mar 2001

The requirements as to the extent of knowledge in the mind of a passenger sufficient to defeat a claim against the Motor Insurers Bureau, of the driver’s lack of insurance, was actual knowledge. The rules implemented a European Directive which required knowledge of the absence of insurance, and must be interpreted accordingly so as to restrict an exclusion from claiming to the possession of some information which led to a conclusion that the driver was not insured. Carelessness, or negligence as to whether the driver was insured was not knowledge, despite the wording of the English rules.
HL Lord Nicholls said: ‘The Court of Justice has stressed repeatedly that exceptions are to be construed strictly. Here, a strict and narrow interpretation of what constitutes knowledge for the purpose of article 1 is reinforced by the subject matter. The subject matter is compensation for damage to property or personal injury caused by vehicles. The general rule is that victims of accidents should have the benefit of protection up to specified minimum amounts, whether or not the vehicle which caused the damage was insured. The exception, therefore, permits a member state, contrary to the general rule, to make no provision for compensation for a person who has suffered personal injury or damage to property. Proportionality requires that a high degree of personal fault must exist before it would be right for an injured passenger to be deprived of compensation. A narrow approach is further supported by the other prescribed limitation on the permissible ambit of any exclusion: the person claiming compensation must have entered the vehicle voluntarily. The need for the passenger to have entered the vehicle voluntarily serves to confirm that the exception is aimed at persons who were consciously colluding in the use of an uninsured vehicle. And it can be noted that the Directive emphasises the exceptional nature of the exclusion of compensation by placing the burden of proving knowledge on the party who seeks to invoke the exception, namely, the institution responsible for paying compensation.’

Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead Lord Mackay of Clashfern Lord Cooke of Thorndon Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Scott of Foscote
Times 06-Mar-2001, Gazette 12-Apr-2001, [2001] UKHL 9, [2001] 2 All ER 43, [2001] 1 WLR 481, [2001] 1 LLR 679, [2001] 1 All ER (Comm) 1105, [2001] PIQR P20, [2001] 2 CMLR 1, [2001] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 679, [2001] RTR 25, [2001] Lloyds Rep IR 493
House of Lords, Bailii
Motor Insurers Bureau (Compensation of Victims of Uninsured Drivers) Agreement 1988, Second EEC Motor Insurance Directive 84/5/EEC
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromEvans v Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions Motor Insurers’ Bureau CA 18-Jan-2001
. .

Cited by:
CitedMcMminn v McMinn and Another QBD 11-Apr-2006
The claimant had been severely injured in a car crash when his younger brother was driving. The driver did not have the owner’s permission to drive, and the insurer sought to avoid laibility.
Held: ‘insurers do not have to prove that the . .
CitedPhillips v Rafiq and Motor Insurers Bureau (MIB) CA 13-Feb-2007
The MIB appealed from a judgment making it liable for an award of damages to the estate of the deceased who had been a passenger in a vehicle which he knew to be being driven without insurance. The estate had not sued the MIB directly, but first . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Road Traffic, Insurance

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.90472

Prudential Insurance Co v Inland Revenue Commissioners: 1904

Contract for payment of sum on event

The Insurance company provided endowment insurance polices. They disagreed with the Commissioners as to whether these were policies of insurance and thus as to how they fell to be stamped. Life insurance was defined in the 1891 Act as ‘insurance upon any life or lives or upon any event or contingency relating to or depending upon any life or lives.’ The instrument that was to be presented for stamping in that case was the policy of insurance and ‘Policy of insurance’ was defined to mean ‘every writing whereby any contract of insurance is made’.
Held: Channell J defined a contract of insurance: ‘It seems to me that for the purpose of determining whether that contract comes within the definition [of life insurance] we must look at it as a whole, and not split it up into two separate parts . . Whereby for some consideration, usually but not necessarily for periodical payments called premiums, you secure for yourself some benefit, usually but not necessarily the payment of a sum of money, upon the happening of some event . . A contract of insurance, then, must be a contract for the payment of a sum of money, or for some corresponding benefit such as the rebuilding of a house or the repairing of a ship, to become due on the happening of an event, which event must have some amount of uncertainty about it, and must be of a character more or less adverse to the interest of the person effecting the insurance.’

Channell J
[1904] 2 KB 658
Stamp Act 1891
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedDepartment of Trade and Industry v St Christopher Motorists Association Ltd 1974
The defendant company provided for the hire of a chauffeur if the insured was disqualified from driving.
Held: Contracts of insurance are not confined to contracts for the payment of money, but may include a contract for some benefit . .
CitedDigital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd v The Financial Services Authority CA 29-Nov-2011
Parties appealed against on order for the winding up of the company. The Authority (FSA) had said that the company which supplied warranties to owners of digital receiver boxes were providing regulated insurance services, but that the companies were . .
CitedDigital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd and Another v Financial Services Authority SC 13-Feb-2013
The appellants challenged an order for the dissolution of their company under the 2000 Acts. They had provided warranties for assorted consumer electrical goods which amounted to insurance, but said that they were not required to be registered under . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Stamp Duty

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.471980

Bedfordshire Police Authority v Constable and others: ComC 20 Jun 2008

The authority insured its primary liability for compensation under the 1886 Act through the claimants and the excess of liability through re-insurers. The parties sought clarification from the court of the respective liabilities of the insurance companies and as to whether the compensation under the Acts counted as damages under the policies. The syndicate said that damages are quintessentially sums which fall to be paid by reason of some breach of duty or obligation.
Held: The question for consideration is what the document would convey to a reasonable person having all the background knowledge which would have reasonably been available to the parties at the time of the contract. There was no clear evidence that the parties had considered the detailed provisions carefully, but was rather a collection of standard clauses. There was no reason to think that the purpose of the Underlying Policy was anything other than the protection of the police fund against claims by third parties for personal injury or damage to property. The claimant was entitled to be indemnified by the defendant pursuant to the Excess Policy in respect of any liability of the claimant to pay compensation under the 1886 Act.

Walker J
[2008] EWHC 1375 (Comm), [2009] Lloyd’s Rep IR 39, [2009] 2 All ER (Comm) 200
Bailii
Police Act 1996, Riot (Damages) Act 1886
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRe Hooley Hill Rubber and Royal Insurance Co CA 1920
When interprting a contract, it is assumed that the draftsman works with a view to certainty of sense and standardisation of terms. Bankes LJ said: ‘Courts should be chary in interfering with the interpretation given to a well-known document and . .
CitedToomey v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd CA 1994
The word ‘reinsurance’ is often used loosely simply to describe any contract of insurance which is placed by or for the benefit of an insurer, but it should be construed more properly to require the insurance of an insurable interest in the subject . .
CitedInvestors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society HL 19-Jun-1997
Account taken of circumstances wihout ambiguity
The respondent gave advice on home income plans. The individual claimants had assigned their initial claims to the scheme, but later sought also to have their mortgages in favour of the respondent set aside.
Held: Investors having once . .
CitedSunport Shipping Limited, Prometheus Maritime Corporation, Celestial Maritime Corporation, Surzur Overseas Limited v Tryg-Baltica International (UK) Ltd (Formerly Know As Colonia Baltica Insurance Ltd) and others CA 24-Jan-2003
(The ‘Kleovoulos of Rhodes’) A large quantity of cocaine was discovered by divers behind a grille in a sea chest at the vessel’s discharge port, Aliveri – having been placed there by unknown third persons at the load port in Colombia, South America. . .
CitedYorkshire Water Services Ltd v Sun Alliance and London Insurance Plc and Others (1) CA 20-Aug-1996
The court was asked whether the costs of flood alleviation works were recoverable under public liability insurance policies.
Held: A claim for the costs of remedial action taken to mitigate future losses were not covered by the terms of the . .
CitedF and K Jabbour v Custodian of Israeli Absentee Property 1953
The court was asked as to the effect of foreign regulations on the ownership of a right of action under an insurance policy, and for that purpose examined whether the plaintiff’s claim against the insurance company was a ‘mere right to claim . .
CitedHall Brothers Steamship Company Limited v Young CA 1939
The shipowners appealed a decision that the underwriters were not liable under collision liability clause. Their ship had collided with another at Dunkirk when the steering gear failed. Under french law the pilot was not liable since he had not been . .
CitedTesco Stores Ltd v Constable and others CA 16-Apr-2008
Tesco voluntarily agreed to indemnify a third party for economic loss. When that third party claimed under the indemnity for economic losses arising out of damage to property of another, Tesco sought to claim under its own public liability insurance . .
CitedTioxide Europe Ltd v CGU International Plc and others CA 20-Jul-2005
The court considered how an insurance contract should be construed. Langley J said: ‘The general principle is that the proper construction is to be determined by the ordinary and natural meaning of the words used in the contractual and commercial . .
CitedCharterhouse Development (France) Limited v Sharp ChD 1998
French courts had held the claimant liable to remedy the deficiency of an insolvent company’s assets under a French law. The insured now sought repayment by its insurers, who denied that this was a payment of damages.
Held: The payment was . .
CitedLancashire County Council v Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd CA 3-Apr-1996
The defendant agreed to indemnify the insured ‘in respect of all sums which the insured shall become legally liable to pay as compensation arising out of’ various matters including wrongful arrest, malicious prosecution and false imprisonment. The . .
MentionedRylands v Fletcher HL 1868
The defendant had constructed a reservoir to supply water to his mill. Water escaped into nearby disused mineshafts, and in turn flooded the plaintiff’s mine. The defendant appealed a finding that he was liable in damages.
Held: The defendant . .
CitedCharter Reinsurance Co Ltd v Fagan and Others HL 24-May-1996
The re-insurers appealed against a finding that they were liable to make payment under a contract which required them to pay ‘sums actually paid.’ They said that the company having become insolvent, no payment would in fact be made.
Held: The . .
CitedJ W Dwyer Ltd v Metropolitan Police District Receiver 1967
The owner of a jewellery shop claimed to recover compensation from the police for damage to his shop in a smash and grab raid. Since there were more than 3 robbers, the police accepted that there had been a riot but defended the claim on the basis . .
CitedDH Edmonds Ltd v East Sussex Police Authority CA 6-Jul-1988
The plaintiffs Brighton jewellers sought compensation from the police authority for a raid on their premises by three or four men. Kenneth Jones J at first instance held that the incident did not involve a tumultuous assembly and accordingly the . .
CitedFord v Receiver for the Metropolitan Police District 1921
Bailhache J considered a claim under the 1886 Act: ‘There must be judgment for the plaintiff, and the question of the quantum of damages must be referred.’ . .
CitedKaufmann Brothers v Liverpool Corporation KBD 1916
It was argued that a claim under the 1886 Act was a claim for ‘alleged neglect or default’ within the meaning of the 1893 Act, so that the claim was time-barred under that Act.
Held: The argument failed. The 1893 Act did not apply.
Lush J . .
CitedPitchers v Surrey County Council 1923
In 1919 there was a riot involving Canadian soldiers from a local Camp. They released fellow soldiers in custody and raided the officers’ mess, and damaged and stole the contents of a tailor’s shop and other shops known as ‘Tin Town’ – a group of . .
CitedBearmans Ltd v Metropolitan Police District Receiver CA 1961
Sellers LJ said: ‘The second plaintiffs had paid some andpound;5,000 for that theft; and for their respective losses these plaintiffs sought to recover damages under the Riot (Damages) Act, 1886’
The court considered that a liberal approach . .
CitedBartoline Limited v Royal Sun Alliance plc 2007
The claimant sought an indemnity under the Public Liability Section of a Combined Policy for: (i) expense incurred by the Environment Agency under section 161 of the Water Resources Act 1991 cleaning up water courses of pollutants after a fire on . .
CitedScott (for and Behalf of All Underwriting Members of Syndicates 401 and 857 at Lloyd’s) v The Copenhagen Reinsurance Company (UK) Ltd CA 16-May-2003
Where an insurance policy required damage to have been caused by an insured risk, the causative link had to be a significant rather than a weak one.
Determining whether transactions are related is therefore an acutely fact sensitive exercise, . .

Cited by:
See AlsoYarl’s Wood Immigration Ltd and others v Bedfordshire Police Authority ComC 30-Sep-2008
The owners of the Yarslwood Immigration centre sought damages under the 1886 Act after a riot at the centre caused substantial damage.
Held: The claim failed: ‘The fact that YWIL and GSL [the appellants] were acting as public authorities . .
Appeal fromBedfordshire Police Authority v Constable CA 12-Feb-2009
The police had responded to a riot at Yarlswood detention centre. They had insurance to cover their liability under the 1886 Act, but the re-insurers said that the insurance did not cover the event, saying that the liability was for statutory . .
See AlsoYarl’s Wood Immigration Ltd and Others v Bedfordshire Police Authority CA 23-Oct-2009
The claimant sought to recover the costs of damage to their centre following a riot, saying that under the 1886 Act, they were liable. It appealed against a ruling that they were unable to claim as a public authority, saying that the 1886 Act was . .
CitedThe Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime v Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co (Europe) Ltd and Others SC 20-Apr-2016
The Court considered the quantification of damages to be awarded to a business suffering under riots under the 1886 Act, and in particular whether such recoverable losses included compensation for consequential losses, including loss of profits and . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Insurance

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.270220

Newbury v Davis: QBD 1974

newbury_davisQBD1974

The owner of a vehicle agreed to lend it to someone else on condition that that person insured against third party risks. In the owner’s absence, that person drove the car on a road without insurance.
Held: The appeal against conviction was allowed: ‘the defendant did not permit Mr Jarvis to use the car. The defendant gave no permission to use it unless Mr Jarvis had a policy of insurance to cover its use, and he had none. Having no policy of insurance, he took the vehicle without the defendant’s permission. In other words, permission given subject to a condition which is unfulfilled is no permission at all. It may be that the difference is a small one between a case where the owner gives unconditional permission in the mistaken belief that the use is covered by insurance, or in the disappointed hope that it will be covered, and the case where the permission is given subject to a condition and that condition is not fulfilled. But to my mind there is a difference and it is one of legal substance. On this view of the case the defendant committed no offence.’

Lord Widgery CJ, MacKenna J
[1974] RTR 367
Road Traffic Act 1972
Cited by:
CitedPhilip Owen Lloyd-Wolper v Robert Moore; National Insurance Guarantee Corporation Plc, Charles Moore CA 22-Jun-2004
The first defendant drove a car belonging to his father and insured by his father. The father consented to the driving but under a mistaken belief that his son was licensed. The claimant was injured by the defendant in a road traffic accident.
DistinguishedBaugh v Crago QBD 1975
The defendant believed that a driver was the holder of a driving licence and permitted him to use the vehicle, when the driver was not in fact such a holder. The prosecutor appealed his acquittal.
Held: Considering Newbury v Davis. The . .
CitedFerrymasters Ltd v Adams 1980
Employers were alleged to have caused or permitted an employee to drive a vehicle on the road while not holding a driving licence authorising him to do so. When the employee had entered the employment, the employers had ensured that he held a valid . .
DistinguishedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Fisher QBD 1992
F was asked to lend L a car. F knew L was disqualified, but agreed provided L found an insured driver with a full valid driving licence. F did not know who L would ask or that he in fact asked R to drive; R was employed as delivery driver and the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Insurance

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.199925

Suez Fortune Investments Ltd and Another v Talbot Underwriting Ltd and Others: ComC 5 Nov 2018

Constructive total loss claim under a war risks policy on the vessel BRILLANTE VIRTUOSO which is being defended on the grounds that the vessel was ‘scuttled’ by her Owner. Disclosure of identity of witness: ‘ In considering an application for non-disclosure of a witness’ identity, the Court applies a two-stage test (see, for example, Kalma v African Minerals Limited [2018] EWHC 120 (QB)). These stages are: (1) The threshold test: the grant of anonymity must be necessary , based on a legitimate fear of danger; (2) If that threshold is met, the court will balance the witness’ interest in anonymity with the interests of the parties in a fair trial, together with the public interest in open justice.
As to the first stage of the test, the threshold of ‘necessity’ is ‘formidable’ (see the Kalma case, and the Yalland case). The applicant must show some direct link between the witness’ legitimate fear of danger, on the one hand, and the disclosure of the witness’ identity, on the other. If the extent of the witness’ fear, or the prospects of the danger eventuating, would not be ‘materially increased’ by the disclosure of the witness’ identity, then it cannot be said that anonymity is necessary, though of course some other protective measures may be (see Re Officer L). Accordingly, anonymity is unlikely to be necessary if the identity of the witness is already known to, or could easily be discovered by, those who threaten harm (see Cherney v Deripaska [2012] EWHC 1781 (Comm)

Justice Teare
[2018] EWHC 2929 (Comm)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedXXX v Camden London Borough Council CA 11-Nov-2020
Anonymity in Court Proceedings – No two stage test
XXX appealed against the refusal to make orders anonymising her name and redacting certain details from published judgments. The appeal raised a point about the proper approach to applications for anonymisation under CPR 39.2. She brought . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Litigation Practice

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.631337

Bedfordshire Police Authority v Constable: CA 12 Feb 2009

The police had responded to a riot at Yarlswood detention centre. They had insurance to cover their liability under the 1886 Act, but the re-insurers said that the insurance did not cover the event, saying that the liability was for statutory compensation and not in damages as covered by the insurance policy.
Held: The insured’s appeal failed. Once one appreciates that the reason for the 1886 Act placing the burden of paying compensation to the victims of riot damage on the police authority is that the police are responsible for law and order and that they are (notionally) in breach of that responsibility, it seems to me, as an English lawyer, that compensation payable is a sum which the police authority is ‘liable to pay as damages’.

[2009] EWCA Civ 64
Bailii
Riot (Damages) Act 1886 2
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedJ W Dwyer Ltd v Metropolitan Police District Receiver 1967
The owner of a jewellery shop claimed to recover compensation from the police for damage to his shop in a smash and grab raid. Since there were more than 3 robbers, the police accepted that there had been a riot but defended the claim on the basis . .
CitedDH Edmonds Ltd v East Sussex Police Authority CA 6-Jul-1988
The plaintiffs Brighton jewellers sought compensation from the police authority for a raid on their premises by three or four men. Kenneth Jones J at first instance held that the incident did not involve a tumultuous assembly and accordingly the . .
CitedHall Brothers Steamship Company Limited v Young 1938
The insured vessel, Trident, went to Dunkirk and engaged a French pilot whose pilot boat developed a fault in its steering gear which caused her to collide with Trident without Trident being in any way to blame. French law had a provision that . .
CitedHall Brothers Steamship Company Limited v Young CA 1939
The shipowners appealed a decision that the underwriters were not liable under collision liability clause. Their ship had collided with another at Dunkirk when the steering gear failed. Under french law the pilot was not liable since he had not been . .
CitedSunport Shipping Limited, Prometheus Maritime Corporation, Celestial Maritime Corporation, Surzur Overseas Limited v Tryg-Baltica International (UK) Ltd (Formerly Know As Colonia Baltica Insurance Ltd) and others CA 24-Jan-2003
(The ‘Kleovoulos of Rhodes’) A large quantity of cocaine was discovered by divers behind a grille in a sea chest at the vessel’s discharge port, Aliveri – having been placed there by unknown third persons at the load port in Colombia, South America. . .
CitedCharterhouse Development (France) Limited v Sharp ChD 1998
French courts had held the claimant liable to remedy the deficiency of an insolvent company’s assets under a French law. The insured now sought repayment by its insurers, who denied that this was a payment of damages.
Held: The payment was . .
CitedYorkshire Water Services Ltd v Sun Alliance and London Insurance Plc and Others (1) CA 20-Aug-1996
The court was asked whether the costs of flood alleviation works were recoverable under public liability insurance policies.
Held: A claim for the costs of remedial action taken to mitigate future losses were not covered by the terms of the . .
CitedBartoline Limited v Royal Sun Alliance plc 2007
The claimant sought an indemnity under the Public Liability Section of a Combined Policy for: (i) expense incurred by the Environment Agency under section 161 of the Water Resources Act 1991 cleaning up water courses of pollutants after a fire on . .
Appeal fromBedfordshire Police Authority v Constable and others ComC 20-Jun-2008
The authority insured its primary liability for compensation under the 1886 Act through the claimants and the excess of liability through re-insurers. The parties sought clarification from the court of the respective liabilities of the insurance . .
See AlsoYarl’s Wood Immigration Ltd and others v Bedfordshire Police Authority ComC 30-Sep-2008
The owners of the Yarslwood Immigration centre sought damages under the 1886 Act after a riot at the centre caused substantial damage.
Held: The claim failed: ‘The fact that YWIL and GSL [the appellants] were acting as public authorities . .

Cited by:
See AlsoYarl’s Wood Immigration Ltd and Others v Bedfordshire Police Authority CA 23-Oct-2009
The claimant sought to recover the costs of damage to their centre following a riot, saying that under the 1886 Act, they were liable. It appealed against a ruling that they were unable to claim as a public authority, saying that the 1886 Act was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Insurance

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.282613

Yorkshire Dale Steamship Co Ltd v Minister of War Transport: HL 1942

Treatment of Merchant as War Vessel

The House considered when a merchant vessel may be treated on the same footing as a war vessel and be deemed to be engaged on a warlike operation.
Held: This depended on the nature of the cargo and the voyage: ‘She was then in the act of proceeding in convoy from Greenock to Narvik with a cargo of petrol for use by His Majesty’s forces in the Norwegian campaign then on foot. The crucial admission was made on behalf of the respondent that at the time of stranding the vessel was engaged in a warlike operation, namely, proceeding from one war base to another war base with military stores for the use of the British forces in the field . . Under certain circumstances, a trading or merchant vessel has been held to be for purposes of the war risk clause engaged in a warlike operation. As illustrative of these circumstances, I may take those of a merchant ship carrying troops, ammunition, guns, tanks, or other military machines or equipment to a theatre of war, or away from a theatre of war . . Such a vessel may be regarded pro hac vice as serving the belligerent purposes of the country and as taking her share in hostilities against the enemy. She is therefore, it is said, to be deemed to be engaged on a warlike operation.’

Lord Wright
[1942] AC 691, [1942] 2 All ER 6
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedSmith New Court Securities Ltd v Scrimgeour Vickers HL 21-Nov-1996
The defendant had made misrepresentations, inducing the claimant to enter into share transactions which he would not otherwise have entered into, and which lost money.
Held: A deceitful wrongdoer is properly liable for all actual damage . .
CitedFogg and Ledgard v The Secretary of State for Defence, Short Admn 13-Dec-2005
The applicants sought judicial review of a decision of the respondent not to name the wreck of the merchant ship SS STORAA as a protected site under the 1986 Act. It had been a merchant ship forming part of a convoy, and was sunk by enemy action in . .
CitedThe Walumba (Owners) v Australian Coastal Shipping Commission 1965
(High Court of Australia) Instead of rescuing the vessel, she had been despatched to recover, the Walumba tug herself came into peril, and was salved by a pilot boat.
Held: The pilot boat was to be awarded pounds 10,000 for its services. A . .
CitedTotal Transport Corporation v Arcadia Petroleum Ltd (‘the Eurus’) CA 18-Nov-1997
Arcadia chartered the Eurus, and had succeeded in their application for an award in arbitration proceedings against Total. The award had been reversed, and they now appealed against that order. The parties disputed whether the amount was an award of . .
CitedPetroleo Brasileiro Sa v Ene Kos 1 Ltd (‘The MT Kos’) SC 2-May-2012
The MT Kos had been chartered by the appellants. The respondents failed to make payments, and notice was given to withdraw the vessel. The contract said that such a notice was without prejudice to any claim. At the time, the vessel was laden. The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Transport, Insurance

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.191190

Nationale-Nederlanden Levensverzekering Mij v Van Leeuwen: ECJ 29 Apr 2015

LevensverzekeringECJ201504

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Direct life assurance – Directive 92/96/EEC – Article 31(3) – Information to be provided to the policyholder – Obligation for the insurer to provide further information on costs and premiums under general unwritten rules of national law

[2015] EUECJ C-51/13
Bailii
Directive 92/96/EEC 31(3)

European, Insurance

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.546202

Porter v Zurich Insurance Company: QBD 5 Mar 2009

The claimant insured his house with the defendants. Severely depressed, drunk and delusional, he set fire to it and now claimed after refusal to pay out. He said that he was not acting as a free agent.
Held: A claimant who seeks to recover pursuant to a policy of insurance in respect of a fire which he himself started is faced with the difficulty that his claim is contrary to public policy and/or contrary to general principles of insurance laws. He had to show that he did not know ‘the nature and quality of the act he was doing; or if he did know it, that he did not know that he was doing what was wrong.’ He failed to establish that to the required level.

Coulson J
[2009] NPC 38, [2009] 2 All ER (Comm) 658, [2009] EWHC 376 (QB)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedDaniel M’Naghten’s Case HL 1843
Daniel M’Naghten suffered from a mental disorder under which he believed that he was being persecuted by various bodies in authority, including the Tory Party. He sought to kill the Tory Prime Minister Sir Robert Peel, but shot and killed instead . .
CitedBritton v Royal Insurance Company 1865
The insured made a claim under his insurance policy for twice the amount he had actually lost. It was an express condition of the insurance policy that a fraudulent part of a claim would avoid the balance of the claim.
Held: The duty of good . .
CitedIn re Young and Harston’s Contract CA 1885
The court set out what was meant by the term ‘wilful default’ when used in a contract for the sale of land. Bowen LJ said: ‘Wilful is a word of familiar use in every branch of law, and although in some branches of the law it may have a special . .
CitedBeresford v Royal Insurance Co Ltd HL 1938
The forfeiture rule was to be applied in a case involving suicide. An insured may not recover under a policy of insurance in respect of loss intentionally caused by his own criminal or tortious act, however clearly the wording of the policy may . .
CitedHardy v Motor Insurers’ Bureau CA 1964
The court was asked whether insurance pursuant to the Road Traffic Act 1960 would provide valid cover for the benefit of a third party injured by deliberately criminal conduct on the part of the driver.
Held: Diplock LJ said: ‘The rule of law . .
CitedGray v Barr CA 1971
A husband had accidentally shot and killed his wife’s lover after threatening him with a shotgun.
Held: The court confirmed the decision at first instance. He was not liable to be indemnified by his insurers for the losses claimed against him . .
CitedCP (A Child) v Royal London Mutual Insurance Society Ltd CA 30-Mar-2006
A mill had burned down when children had lit a fire. They had not intended the fire to get out of hand as it did. The insurance company refused to pay out on the basis that the policy did not cover damage arising from ‘any wilful malicious or . .
CitedD’Autremont v Fire Association of Philadelphia 1892
(USA) The insured was insane when he started a fire. The insurance company refused to pay.
Held: The claim succeeded. Macomber J said: ‘In actions upon policies to cover damages occasioned by loss through fire, it is not a defence which the . .
CitedHowie v CGU Insurance Plc OHCS 17-Aug-2005
The pursuer claimed under an insurance policy for damage caused by a fire which he had started. The fire had killed his mother. He was charged with murder and, at his criminal trial, the jury had returned a unanimous verdict of not guilty on the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.320873

Quinn Direct Insurance Ltd v The Law Society of England and Wales: CA 14 Jul 2010

Q had provided professional indemnity insurance to a firm of solicitors in which the Law Society had intervened. Claims were made against the firm, but Q declined to pay, saying that the apparently fraudulent activities of the firm fell outside the terms of the policy. Q sought access to the firm’s files and accounting records. The intervention agent had refused saying that this would infringe the privacy of other clients. The Society agreed that the making of a claim by a client amounted to a waiver of confidentiality by that client, but no further.
Held: The insurer’s appeal failed. Neither the defendant nor any client of the firm was party to the contract of insurance and could not be bound by its terms. The Society had possession of the materials through its agent under the provision of the 1974 Act, and ‘There is no reciprocity in this respect between the solicitor/insured and Quinn/the insurer on the one hand or between the Law Society and Quinn/the insurer on the other.’
Nor was it correct to say that by virtue of the indemnity rules, the insurer was somehow meshed in with Society so as to allow access. If a ‘circle of confidence’ existed, it did not include the insurer.

Rimer lJ, Jackson LJ
[2010] EWCA Civ 805, A3/2009/2499, [2010] WLR (D) 185, [2010] NPC 80, [2010] Lloyd’s Rep IR 655
Bailii, WLRD
Solicitors Act 1974, The Solicitors’ Indemnity Insurance Rules 2007
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedJ Rothschild Assurance Plc v Collyear and Othersl ComC 29-Sep-1998
A claim against an insurance company for compensation for pensions mis-selling was properly subject of a claim by the insurance company in turn under its own professional indemnity insurance policy. Under a ‘claim made’ policy, the risk insured is . .
CitedRegina v Special Commissioner And Another, ex parte Morgan Grenfell and Co Ltd HL 16-May-2002
The inspector issued a notice requiring production of certain documents. The respondents refused to produce them, saying that they were protected by legal professional privilege.
Held: Legal professional privilege is a fundamental part of . .
CitedHLB Kidsons (A Firm) v Lloyd’s Underwriters Subscribing to Lloyd’s Policy No 621/ Pk1D00101 and others CA 31-Oct-2008
In construing the terms of insurance policies written in the Lloyd’s market, counsel submitted that the court should have regard to the post-contract conduct of persons acting for the parties, on the basis that the conduct of those persons was . .
Appeal FromQuinn Direct Insurance Ltd v The Law Society of England and Wales ChD 23-Oct-2009
The defendant had intervened in a solicitors’ firm insured by the claimants. The claimants sought access to files and accounting records so that it could defend insurance claims. The defendant denied access to files other than those on which claims . .
CitedB and Others Russell McVeagh McKenzie Bartleet and Co v Auckland District Law Society, Gary J Judd PC 19-May-2003
(New Zealand) Solicitors resisted requests to disclose papers in breach of legal professional privilege from their professional body investigating allegations of professional misconduct against them.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The . .
CitedRegina v Derby Magistrates Court Ex Parte B HL 19-Oct-1995
No Breach of Solicitor Client Confidence Allowed
B was charged with the murder of a young girl. He made a confession to the police, but later changed his story, saying his stepfather had killed the girl. He was acquitted. The stepfather was then charged with the murder. At his committal for trial, . .
CitedMarch Cabaret Club and Casino Ltd v The London Assurance 1975
. .
CitedHilton v Barker Booth and Eastwood HL 3-Feb-2005
The claimant had instructed the defendant solicitors to act for him, where he was to contract with another client of the same solicitor in a land development. The solicitor failed to disclose that the other client had convictions for dishonesty, and . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Insurance

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.420749

The Seashell of Lisson Grove Ltd and Others v Aviva Insurance Ltd and Others: ComC 1 Nov 2011

The claimant’s fish restaurant had burned down. The court was asked to make a preliminary determination of issues on construction on insurance policy. The insured sought to evade what the insurer said were breaches of warranty, misrepresentations and material non-disclosure.
Held: The assured was not prevented fromm relying on a non-invalidation clause where damage is in fact caused before the assured is able to give notice of the increased risk. ‘There is no justification . . for denying an assured the benefit of the non-invalidation clause where, there having been a breach of warranty unknown to the assured or beyond his control which increases the risk of damage, damage is in fact caused before he learns of the breach of warranty. A breach of warranty will usually increase the risk of damage and so effect is given to the words ‘which increases the risk of damage’. The argument advanced by counsel for the Defendant was, in effect (albeit not counsel’s intention), an alternative way of suggesting that the non-invalidation clause, contrary to my view, did not apply to breaches of warranty. The clause enables the assured to advance his claim notwithstanding an act, omission or alteration which has increased the risk of damage, such as a breach of warranty, so long as the act, omission or alteration is unknown to or beyond the control of the assured and he gives immediate notice of it once aware of it and pays the additional premium required.’

Teare J
[2011] EWHC 1761 (Comm)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedGreenock Steamship Co v Maritime Insurance Co 1903
. .
CitedMentz, Decker and Co v Maritime Insurance Co 1910
. .
CitedLiberian Insurance Agency v Mosse 1977
. .
CitedAnsari v New India Assurance Ltd CA 18-Feb-2009
The insured appealed against the refusal of his claim under a commercial policy of his premises which had been damaged in a fire. . .
CitedFNCB Ltd v Barnet Devanney and Co Ltd CA 1-Jul-1999
An insurance broker was asked to provide insurance to protect a mortgagee but did not arrange mortgage protection cover.
Held: He was in breach of his contract even though the law relating to such insurance was unsure. He was not entitled to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.448077

HIH Casualty and General Insurance Limited and others v Chase Manhattan Bank and others: HL 20 Feb 2003

The insurance company had paid claims on policies used to underwrite the production of TV films. The re-insurers resisted the claims against them by the insurers on the grounds of non-disclosure by the insured, or in the alternative damages for misrepresentation. The policies were novel and sophisticated contracts and included clauses modifying the duties of disclosure by inclusion of a ‘truth of statement clause’. The clause appeared expressly not to require any representation as to the financial viabillity of the projected films, and to avoid liability for any misrepresentation made to the insurers. In this case the insurers sought to rely upon representations of the insurers themselves.
Held: The clause was intended to excuse a wide range of misrepresentation, but the law, on public policy grounds, does not permit a contracting party to exclude liability for his own fraud in inducing the making of the contract. Express and clear words were needed to avoid the consequences of fraudulent misrepresentation by a party’s agent and ‘it is extraordinarily unlikely that parties to a contract will agree a term which excludes liability for fraud with sufficient clarity to raise squarely the question of whether it should be lawful to do so’. The insurers were entitled to damages or to avoid the contract for fraudulent misrepresentation or fraudulent non-disclosure by the agent. Lord Hoffmann said that discussions about the effect and nature of the precise words used by law lords in either agreeing, entirely agreeing or concurring in the words of others amounted to an exercise which had ‘more in common with reading tea leaves than with legal reasoning’.

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Steyn, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Scott of Foscote
[2003] UKHL 6, [2003] 1 All ER Comm 349, [2003] 2 Lloyd’s Law Reports 61, [2004] ICR 1708, [2003] Lloyds Rep IR 230, [2003] 1 CLC 358
House of Lords, Bailii
Misrepresentation Act 1967 2(1), Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromHIH Casualty And General Insurance Limited and Others v The Chase Manhattan Bank and Others CA 31-Jul-2001
Parties syndicating finance for a film obtained the security of an insurance which is designed to pay up to the sum insured, if the revenues generated by the film were insufficient to repay the loan finance plus associated expenses. The polices were . .
CitedCanada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King PC 21-Jan-1952
A lease of a freight shed exonerated the lessor from ‘any claim . . for . . damage . . to . . Goods . . being . . in the said shed’ and requiring the lessee to indemnify the lessor ‘from and against all claims’. The negligent use of an oxy-acetylene . .
CitedLazarus Estates Ltd v Beasley CA 1956
There was a privative clause in the 1954 Act. A landlord’s declaration under the Act that work of a specified value, supporting an increase in rent, had been carried out on leased premises, could not be questioned after 28 days of its service on the . .
CitedSociete Anonyme d’Intermediaries Luxembourgeois v Farex Gie CA 1995
The court considered the duty of disclosure impsed upon an insured: ‘Why should it be a breach of good faith sufficient to deprive the assured of his contract if the agent fails to disclose something which, had the assured known of it, would not . .
CitedWeir v Bell 1878
‘I think that every person who authorizes another to act for him in the making of any contract, undertakes for the absence of fraud in that person in the execution of the authority given, as much as he undertakes for its absence in himself when he . .
CitedS Pearson and Son Ltd v Dublin Corporation HL 1907
A clause in a building contract provided that the contractor should satisfy himself as to the dimensions, levels and nature of all existing works. Did this exclude an action based on alleged fraudulent misrepresentations by the council’s engineers . .
CitedBanque Keyser Ullmann SA v Skandia (UK) Insurance Co Ltd CA 1990
A loan was to be made. An agent of the borrower came to know of the fraudulent nature of the loan, but said nothing.
Held: A failure to disclose a known fraud may itself amount to a misrepresentation, but nondisclosure (whether dishonest or . .
CitedPan Atlantic Insurance Co Ltd and Another v Pine Top Insurance Co Ltd HL 27-Jul-1994
The plaintiff had written long term (tail) insurance. The defendant came to re-insure it. On a dispute there were shown greater losses than had been disclosed, and that this had been known to the Plaintiff.
Held: ‘material circumstance’ which . .
CitedPCW Syndicate v PCW Reinsurers CA 8-Sep-1995
A policy was not avoided by the agent’s failure to disclose his own dishonesty with the principal. In this area there was no difference between the law of Marine Insurance and other insurances. . .
CitedBlackburn, Low and Co v Vigors HL 1887
There was a condition precedent of full disclosure of material facts in an insurance contract. The duty of an agent to disclose circumstances within his own knowledge to the insurer is independent of the duty of the insured to make disclosure, but: . .
CitedHollier v Rambler Motors (AMC) Ltd CA 19-Nov-1971
The plaintiff left his car with the defendant garage for repair. Whilst there it was substantially damaged by fire. The defendant sought to rely upon their terms which would negative liability, saying that the terms had been incorporated by . .
CitedAilsa Craig Fishing Co Ltd v Malvern Fishing Co Ltd HL 26-Nov-1981
Even though a shipowner who had carried cargo on deck was not entitled to rely on the exceptions to liability in his contract, a limitation clause was different and should not be construed by reference to the specially exacting standards applicable . .
CitedGillespie Bros and Co Ltd v Roy Bowles Transport Ltd CA 1973
The court looked at how it should construe the Canada Steamship guidelines with regard to an exemption clause absolving one party of responsibility for negligence. There was a express reference to negligence by the words ‘save harmless and keep . . . .
CitedSmith v UMB Chrysler (Scotland) Ltd HL 9-Nov-1977
The principles set out in Canada Steamship apply to ‘clauses which purport to exempt one party to a contract from liability’. The principles should be applied without ‘mechanistic construction’.
Lord Keith of Kinkel said: The tests were . .
CitedNational Westminster Bank v Utrecht-America Finance Company CA 10-May-2001
An agreement between the parties for assignment or novation of a credit agreement, contained a ‘take out’ agreement (‘TOA’). The defendant began proceedings in California to rescind the agreement, and the claimants obtained summary judgement under . .
CitedGeorge Mitchell (Chesterhall) Ltd v Finney Lock Seeds Ltd CA 1982
It would not be fair or reasonable to allow seed merchants to rely on a clause limiting their liability for defective seeds. It was relevant that, in the course of dealing, the seed merchants ‘rarely, if ever, invoke the clause’.
Kerr LJ said: . .
CitedToomey v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd (No 2) QBD 1995
Applying Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King, Colman J said: ‘Notwithstanding the commercial purpose of this transaction, the correct approach, as a matter of construction, is to conclude that in fact the effect of cl (a) is only to exclude the . .
CitedToomey v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd CA 1994
The word ‘reinsurance’ is often used loosely simply to describe any contract of insurance which is placed by or for the benefit of an insurer, but it should be construed more properly to require the insurance of an insurable interest in the subject . .
CitedLee v Jones CCP 1864
Jones had guaranteed to Lee payment of any balance due to them by their agent Packer. Jones sought to set aside the guarantee on ground of fraud by Lee. The fraud alleged was the failure of Lee to disclose that Packer had not properly accounted to . .
CitedRivaz v Gerussi Brothers and Co CA 1880
Underwriters were held entitled to avoid insurance policies because of concealment of the undervalue of the insured shipments. Brett LJ said: ‘Here it was not only a concealment, but a fraudulent concealment, for the matter concealed was kept back . .
CitedBanque Keyser Ullmann SA v Skandia (UK) Insurance Co Ltd HL 1991
Banks had made loans against property which the borrower had said was valuable, and, also insurance policies against any shortfall on the realisation of the property. The borrower was a swindler and the property worthless. The insurers relied upon a . .
CitedGluckstein v Barnes; Re Olympia Ltd, ex parte Gluckstein HL 1900
Directors’ hidden profits disclosable
Promoters of a company had acquired a property intending its resale through the sale of shares in the company. In doing so the original directors made a substantial profit which they did not disclose (though it was discoverable). The company became . .
CitedBrownlie v Campbell; Brownlie v Miller HL 1880
Silence where there is a duty to speak, may amount to a misrepresentation. Lord Blackburn said: ‘where there is a duty or an obligation to speak, and a man in breach of that duty or obligation holds his tongue and does not speak, and does not say . .
CitedMackender v Feldia AG CA 1966
A clause provided that an insurance policy should be governed by Belgian law and that ‘any disputes arising thereunder shall be exclusively subject to Belgian jurisdiction.’ The underwriters avoided the contract for non-disclosure of material facts . .
CitedBlackburn, Low and Co v Vigors CA 1886
Lord Esher MR: ‘This seems to me to be the true doctrine. The freedom from mis-representation or concealment is a condition precedent to the right of the assured to insist on the performance of the contract, so that on a failure of the performance . .
CitedHeyman v Darwins Limited HL 1942
An arbitration clause will survive a repudiatory breach: ‘I agree with the Lord Chancellor in thinking that the true ground of the decision in Jureidini v National British and Irish Millers Insurance Co Ltd was the narrowness of the field of . .
CitedLazarus Estates Ltd v Beasley CA 1956
There was a privative clause in the 1954 Act. A landlord’s declaration under the Act that work of a specified value, supporting an increase in rent, had been carried out on leased premises, could not be questioned after 28 days of its service on the . .

Cited by:
CitedDunnachie v Kingston Upon Hull City Council CA 11-Feb-2004
Compensation for non-economic loss brought about by the manner of an unfair dismissal is, on authority and on principle, recoverable. The award of such compensation by the employment tribunal in the present case was not excessive and was adequately . .
CitedFrans Maas (Uk) Ltd v Samsung Electronics (Uk) Ltd ComC 30-Jun-2004
A large volume of mobile phones were stolen from a warehouse. The owner claimed damages from the bailee. The defendant said that standard terms applied limiting their responsibility to value calculated by weight.
Held: There was a bailment . .
CitedSaggar v Ministry of Defence EAT 25-May-2004
Three Defence employees sought to bring claims of variously race and sex discrimination against the Ministry. In each case their services were provided almost entirely abroad, and the defendant argued that there was no jurisdiction to hear the case, . .
CitedAdvanced Industrial Technology Corporation Ltd v Bond Street Jewellers Ltd CA 4-Jul-2006
The claimant left a valuable necklace with the defendant jewellers for sale. The jewellers fell into financial difficulties, and the director gave the necklace as security for a loan to the company. The jeweller failed to maintain payments on the . .
CitedRegus (UK) Ltd v Epcot Solutions Ltd CA 15-Apr-2008
The appellant had contracted to provide office accomodation to the defendant. The air conditioning did not work and there were other defects. The appellant now challenged a finding of liability and that its contract terms which were said to totally . .
CitedHayward v Zurich Insurance Company Plc SC 27-Jul-2016
The claimant had won a personal injury case and the matter had been settled with a substantial payout by the appellant insurance company. The company now said that the claimant had grossly exaggerated his injury, and indeed wasfiully recovered at . .
CitedLB Holdings Intermediate 2 Ltd, The Joint Administrators of v Lehman Brothers International (Europe), The Joint Administrators of and Others SC 17-May-2017
In the course of the insolvent administration of the bank, substantial additional sums were received. Parties appealed against some orders made on the application to court for directions as to what was to be done with the surplus.
Held: The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Media, Contract

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.179502

Post Office v Norwich Union Fire Insurance Society Ltd: CA 1967

A contract of insurance provided an indemnity for ‘all sums which the insured shall become legally liable to pay as compensation in respect of loss of property’. The claim was by the Post Office against a contractor, Potters, for damaging one of their cables which in consequence the Post Office had to repair. Before the Post Office had sued Potters, Potters went into liquidation. The Post Office sued the insurance company direct purporting to make use of the 1930 Act, but before the Post Office’s claim against Potters had been the subject of adjudication or agreement.
Held: A third party claimant could not sue the insurer directly, pursuant to the 1930 Act, until the existence and amount of the liability of the insured had been established by judgment or award or agreement. The reason for this was that the rights transferred by the Act were subject to the terms of the policy. Since the insured could not have claimed an indemnity until their liability had been established, the Post Office could be in no better position. The insurers’ argument that the Post Office had no cause of action against the insurers until the establishment of the existence and amount of the liability of the insured was therefore accepted. Though leave was necessary to begin or continue proceedings against a company in liquidation, the court considered that leave ought to be given automatically if the 1930 Act were applicable.
Lord Denning MR said: ‘It seems to me that the insured only acquires a right to sue for the money when the liability to the injured person has been established so as to give rise to a right of indemnity. His liability to the injured person must be ascertained and determined to exist, either by judgment of the court or by award in arbitration or by agreement. Until that is done the right to an indemnity does not arise.’
The liability must be ‘ascertained and determined to exist’, and that this may be achieved by judgment, arbitration award or agreement: ‘In these circumstances I think the right to sue for these moneys does not arise until the liability of the wrongdoer is established and the amount ascertained. How is this to be done? If there is an unascertained claim for damages in tort, it cannot be proved in the bankruptcy; nor in the liquidation of the company. But nevertheless the injured person can bring an action against the wrongdoer. ‘
Salmon LJ said that when the liability is established, it dates from the date when the cause of action arose: ‘The case really resolves itself into this simple question: Could Potters on June 17, 1965, have successfully sued their insurers for the sum of andpound;839 10s 3d which they were denying they were under any obligation to pay the Post Office? Stated in that way, I should have thought the question admits of only one answer. Obviously Potters could not have claimed that money from their insurers. It is quite true that if Potters in the end are shown to have been legally liable for the damage resulting from the accident to the cable, their liability in law dates from the moment when the accident occurred and the damage was suffered. But whether or not there is any legal liability and, if so, the amount due from the Potters to the Post Office can, in my view, only be finally ascertained either by agreement between Potters and the Post Office or by an action or arbitration between Potters and the Post Office. ‘

Lord Denning MR, Salmon LJ
[1967] 2 QB 363, [1967] 1 Lloyds Rep 216
Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 1930
Citing:
ApprovedWest Wake Price and Co v Ching 1957
A clerk employed by a firm of accountants defrauded two of the firm’s clients of andpound;20,000 over a period of about three years.
Held: One can not ‘pay’ a cause of action.
Devlin J said: ‘I think that the primary meaning of the word . .

Cited by:
CitedFirst National Tricity Finance Ltd v OT Computers Ltd; In re OT Computers Ltd (in administration) CA 25-May-2004
The company had gone into liquidation. They had sold consumer policies as extended warranties on behalf of the claimant. The company had insured its own joint liability under the contracts, and the claimant sought information from the company’s . .
MentionedAer Lingus v Gildacroft Ltd and Another CA 17-Jan-2006
The claimant had been found liable to pay damages for personal injury, and now sought contribution from the defendants. The defendants said that they were out of time since the contribution action had been commenced more than 2 years after the . .
CitedLaw Society of England and Wales and others v Shah and others ChD 30-Nov-2007
Solicitor firms had been made bankrupt leaving a shortfall after thefts from client accounts of over 12 million pounds. The thief had diappeared, and the other partners were now discharged form bankruptcy. The Law Society accepted that it could not . .
AttackedBradley v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd HL 1989
Mrs Bradley was employed by Dart Mill several times from 1933 and 1970 and acquired byssinosis from inhaling cotton dust. The company was wound up in 1975 and dissolved in 1976. In 1984 she applied to the court for pre-action disclosure under . .
CitedTeal Assurance Company Ltd v WR Berkley Insurance (Europe) Ltd SC 31-Jul-2013
An international engineering company had several layers of professional indemnity insurance. The top later did not cover claims originating in the US or Canada. The several insurers now disputed apportionment of liability between them. The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Insolvency

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.198401

Shipowners’ Mutual Protection and Indemnity Association (Luxembourg) v Containerships Denizcilik Nakliyat Ve Ticaret As (‘Yusuf Cepnioglu’): CA 20 Apr 2016

The court had to ascertain the juridical nature of a foreign statute which gives a victim the right to sue a defendant’s insurer directly without first suing the insured.

Moore-Bick VP CA, Longmore, McFarlane LJJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 386
Bailii
England and Wales

Insurance, International

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.562452

Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance Ltd and Another: Misc 4 Oct 2012

Manchester County Court – The claimant sought repayment of insurance premiums paid as payment protection insurance when aking out a loan with the defendants as advised by the second defendant. The second defendant was in liquidation by the time her claim was issued. In pursuing a claim for at the most andpound;5,000, her lawyers had accumulated costs to date of andpound;320,000.

Recorder Yip QC
[2012] EW Misc 24 (CC)
Bailii
Consumer Credit Act 1974 140A 140B 140C 140D
Citing:
BindingHarrison and Another v Black Horse Ltd CA 12-Oct-2011
The appellant sought under section 104A to recover a Payment Protection Insurance premium paid in support of a loan. The borrower dealt directly with the lender, who acted as an intermediary with the insurer. The commission taken by the lender was . .

Cited by:
Appeal fromPlevin v Paragon Personal Finance Ltd and Another CA 16-Dec-2013
The claimant sought repayment of a personal protection insurance premium paid to her broker. The broker was now in insolvent liquidation, and she sought to recover the premium from the next intermediary.
Held: Any limitation of section . .
At County CourtPlevin v Paragon Personal Finance Ltd SC 12-Nov-2014
PPI Sale – No Recovery from Remote Parties
The claimant sought repayment of payment protection insurance premiums paid by her under a policy with Norwich Union. The immediate broker arranging the loan was now insolvent, and she sought repayment from the second and other level intermediaties. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Costs, Consumer

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510059

AIG Europe Sa and Others v John Wood Group Plc and Another: ComC 24 Sep 2021

‘The Claimants, in three separate but related proceedings, are various insurers who seek to continue, on the return date, anti-suit injunctions which were granted on a without notice basis in August 2021. The injunctions relate to proceedings commenced by the Second Defendant against the Claimants in February 2021 in the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta.’
Mr Justice Jacob
[2021] EWHC 2567 (Comm)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 25 October 2021; Ref: scu.668385

Rozanes v Bowen: CA 1928

The court considered a proposal form for a jeweler’s block policy as filled in by the insured or his agent which incorrectly identified only one previous loss although there were several previous losses. The form stated that ‘It is understood that this proposal will serve as the basis of the contract if a policy is issued’.
Held: Scrutton LJ said: ‘The second point [taken by the insured’s Counsel] was that the answers were not in any way incorporated with the policy so that the correct answering was a condition precedent. The answer to that appears to be at the bottom of the form: ‘This proposal is to serve as the basis of the contract’; and, if so, the truth of the statements in it is equally the basis of the contract.’
Lord Sankey said: ‘The same law was laid down by the Court of Appeal by Lord Esher . . in Hambrough v Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York 72 L.T. 140, which was decided as far back as 1895. There the words in the proposal were not quite the same as the words in the proposal in the present case, but the Lord Chief Justice in the Court below said in his judgment that in his view the proposal was made the basis of the contract, and that the legal effect of the express warranty of the truth of the statements in the proposal is that if any of the statements is untrue the policies cannot be enforced by anyone. He was therefore following almost exactly the law laid down in the House of Lords by Lord Eldon in 1815 in the Newcastle Fire Insurance Company v Macmorran and Co., 3 Dow (H.L.) 255. I only refer to those cases to show that the law in this country at any rate has been settled in that respect for, it appears to me, over a century.’
Scrutton, Sankey LJJ
(1928) 32 Ll L Rep 98
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedGenesis Housing Association Ltd v Liberty Syndicate Management Ltd CA 4-Oct-2013
The housing association was to develop an estate of social housing, supported by an insurance guarantee. The insurance proposal contained a clause stating that the information in the proposal was to form the basis of the policy, and that the policy . .
CitedGenesis Housing Association Ltd v Liberty Syndicate Management Ltd TCC 8-Nov-2012
Insurers had rejected a claim under the policy, saying that the proposal form had included a basis of insurance declaration warranted by the proposer, and that since it had named a main contractor different to the one named, there was no liability . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 17 October 2021; Ref: scu.512348

The National Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Society Ltd v HSBC Insurance (UK) Ltd: ComC 19 Apr 2010

Gavin Kealey QC DHCJ set out the concept of double insurance: ‘Double insurance arises where the same party is insured with two (or more) insurers in respect of the same interest on the same subject-matter against the same risks. If a loss by a peril insured against occurs, the general rule is that, subject to any particular modifying terms and to the limits of indemnity provided under each insurance contract, the insured may recover for the whole of the loss from either insurer. Upon such indemnity being paid to the insured by either one of the two insurers, that insurer is, in general, entitled to recover a contribution from the other.’
Gavin Kealey QC DHCJ
[2010] EWHC 773 (Comm), [2010] 1 CLC 557
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedEagle Star Insurance Co Ltd v Provincial Insurance Plc PC 24-May-1993
Two insurance companies were liable to contribute equally to an amount payable to a third party. The doctrine of contribution could be modified by contract and the matter should be considered by reference to the parties’ contractual liabilities. . .
CitedAlbion Insurance Co Ltd v Government Insurance Office (NSW) 31-Oct-1969
(High Court of Australia) Insurance – Contribution between insurers – Identity of risk insured – Loss covered by two policies – General nature and purpose of policies different – Extent of rights and liabilities created under policies different – . .
CitedLegal and General Assurance Society Ltd v Drake Insurance Co Ltd CA 15-Jan-1991
An insurance company, having paid under the policy to a doubly insured party, sought contribution from the second insurer, who had not been notified of the claim by the insured. The claim for a contribution was one in equity, but since the company . .

Cited by:
CitedZurich Insurance Plc UK Branch v International Energy Group Ltd SC 20-May-2015
A claim had been made for mesothelioma following exposure to asbestos, but the claim arose in Guernsey. Acknowledging the acute difficultis particular to the evidence in such cases, the House of Lords, in Fairchild. had introduced the Special Rule . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.408675

Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council v Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd: CA 6 Feb 2006

The deceased had come into contact with asbestos when working on building sites for more than one contractor. The claimant here sought contribution from the defendants for the damages it had paid to his estate. The issue was as to liability on public liability policies which covered claims made during the currency of the policy rather than under employers’ liability polcies which covered damage incurred during the policy.
Held: MMU’s policy required the injury rather than its cause, to arise during the policy, and they were liable to indemnify Bolton unless CU were liable. CU’s policy provided cover only during the time of exposure, and the claimant had no claim against them. An insurer is entitled to say that he has only agreed to issue on certain terms and he ought to be able to rely on that position not only against his insured but also as against a co-insurer. The rejection by an insurer on the grounds of lack of cover could not be counted as a waiver of his right later to plead a breach of condition even in respect of a breach which had already happened.
Auld LJ, Longmore LJ, Hallett LJ
[2006] EWCA Civ 50, Times 09-Feb-2006, [2006] 1 WLR 1492, [2007] Lloyd’s Rep IR 173
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedCartledge v E Jopling and Sons Ltd HL 1963
The plaintiffs were steel dressers who, in the course of their employment, had inhaled quantities of noxious dust which had caused them to suffer from pneumoconiosis. They issued proceedings on 1 October 1956 but were unable to show any breach of . .
CitedKeenen v Miller Insulation and Engineering Ltd 8-Dec-1987
The claimant’s cause of action for lung fibrosis did not arise at the time he was exposed to asbestos between August 1952 and May 1953 because at that stage he had not suffered physical injury by May 1953. Basing himself on the evidence of Dr Rudd . .
CitedPromet Engineering (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Formerly Self-Elevating Platform Management Pte Limited) v Nicholas Colwyn Sturge and others (The Nukila) CA 26-Mar-1997
Insurers were liable for other damage to ship hull if there had been more than a latent defect in it. In Inchmaree clauses in English law, ‘damage’ usually refers to a changed physical state. . .
CitedMcCaul v Elias Wild 14-Sep-1989
The plaintiff who had suffered pleural thickening from inhalation of asbestos fibres in 1943 – 1950 suffered no actionable injury until about 1985, when he first experienced breathlessness. . .
CitedArnold v Central Electricity Generating Board HL 22-Oct-1987
The plaintiff was widow and administratrix of the estate of her deceased husband. He had worked from April 1938 to April 1943 for a predecessor to the CEGB. He had been exposed to asbestos dust as a result of his employer’s negligence and breach of . .
CitedGuidera v NEI Projects (India) Ltd 17-Nov-1988
The plaintiff was exposed to asbestos in 1952 and 1953 and later diagnosed with asbestosis.
Held: He had suffered no injury by 4th June 1954 because physical injury would not occur for at least 5 (and more likely 10 – 20) years after exposure. . .
CitedJameson and Wyatt (Executors of the Estate of David Allen Jameson) v Central Electricity Generating Board and Babcock Energy Limited 10-Mar-1995
The plaintiff claimed damages for mesothelioma. CEGB had provided a contractual indemnity in respect of damage or injury occurring before building works were taken over by a client in 1960. The question was whether a workman who died from . .
CitedKammins Ballrooms Co Limited v Zenith Investments (Torquay) Limited HL 1970
The tenant had served his section 26 notice under the 1954 Act, but then began the court proceedings before the minumum two month period had expired. The landlord did not take the point at first, and delivered an answer and negotiated compensation. . .
CitedChina National Foreign Trade Transportation Corporation v Evlogia Shipping Co SA of Panama (The Mihalios Xilas) HL 1979
A hire clause was in bespoke terms providing for withdrawal ‘in default of payment’. The payment of hire for the final instalment was deficient because, as the umpire held, the charterers’ deductions for the length of the final voyage and bunkers on . .
CitedWelch v Royal Exchange Assurance CA 1938
The court was asked whether compliance with a clause in the insurance contract was a condition precedent. There was also a question whether the insured could rely on facts arising after the making of their claim.
Held: If a clause does not set . .
CitedPeyman v Lanjani CA 1985
Application was made for consent to assign a lease. The court was asked whether or not the purchaser of a leasehold interest in a property, who had elected to affirm the contract despite a repudiatory breach by the vendor, could be held to his . .
CitedLegal and General Assurance Society Ltd v Drake Insurance Co Ltd CA 15-Jan-1991
An insurance company, having paid under the policy to a doubly insured party, sought contribution from the second insurer, who had not been notified of the claim by the insured. The claim for a contribution was one in equity, but since the company . .
CitedEagle Star Insurance Co Ltd v Provincial Insurance Plc PC 24-May-1993
Two insurance companies were liable to contribute equally to an amount payable to a third party. The doctrine of contribution could be modified by contract and the matter should be considered by reference to the parties’ contractual liabilities. . .
CitedOliver Ashworth (Holdings) Limited v Ballard (Kent) Limited CA 18-Mar-1999
In order for the landlord to claim double rent where a tenant held over unlawfully after the tenancy was determined, the landlord must not do anything to indicate that the lease might be continuing, for example by denying the validity of break . .
CitedJames, Regina v; Regina v Karimi CACD 25-Jan-2006
The defendants appealed their convictions for murder, saying that the court had not properly guided the jury on provocation. The court was faced with apparently conflicting decision of the House of Lords (Smith) and the Privy Council (Holley).
Cited by:
CitedLexington Insurance Co v AGF Insurance Ltd HL 30-Jul-2009
The respondent insurers had been held liable in Washington, and had been granted indemnity against the appellants by the Court of Appeal. The insurance contract had been under the law of Pennsylvania, but that of the re-insurance under the law of . .
ContrastedEmployers’ Liability Insurance ‘Trigger’ Litigation: BAI (Run Off) Ltd v Durham and Others SC 28-Mar-2012
The court considered the liability of insurers of companies now wound up for mesothelioma injuries suffered by former employees of those companies, and in particular whether the 1930 Act could be used to impose liability. The insurers now appealed . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.238308

Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd v Provincial Insurance Plc: PC 24 May 1993

Two insurance companies were liable to contribute equally to an amount payable to a third party. The doctrine of contribution could be modified by contract and the matter should be considered by reference to the parties’ contractual liabilities.
Lord Woolf
Times 09-Jun-1993, [1994] 1 AC 130, [1993] UKPC 22
Bailii
Citing:
Not FollowedLegal and General Assurance Society Ltd v Drake Insurance Co Ltd CA 15-Jan-1991
An insurance company, having paid under the policy to a doubly insured party, sought contribution from the second insurer, who had not been notified of the claim by the insured. The claim for a contribution was one in equity, but since the company . .

Cited by:
CitedBolton Metropolitan Borough Council v Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd CA 6-Feb-2006
The deceased had come into contact with asbestos when working on building sites for more than one contractor. The claimant here sought contribution from the defendants for the damages it had paid to his estate. The issue was as to liability on . .
CitedThe National Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Society Ltd v HSBC Insurance (UK) Ltd ComC 19-Apr-2010
Gavin Kealey QC DHCJ set out the concept of double insurance: ‘Double insurance arises where the same party is insured with two (or more) insurers in respect of the same interest on the same subject-matter against the same risks. If a loss by a . .
CitedZurich Insurance Plc UK Branch v International Energy Group Ltd SC 20-May-2015
A claim had been made for mesothelioma following exposure to asbestos, but the claim arose in Guernsey. Acknowledging the acute difficultis particular to the evidence in such cases, the House of Lords, in Fairchild. had introduced the Special Rule . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.80208

Legal and General Assurance Society Ltd v Drake Insurance Co Ltd: CA 15 Jan 1991

An insurance company, having paid under the policy to a doubly insured party, sought contribution from the second insurer, who had not been notified of the claim by the insured. The claim for a contribution was one in equity, but since the company had paid in excess of their true liability, because of a ‘ratable proportion’ clause, they were not entitled to recover any part of the voluntary payment. The matter should be looked at at the time of the loss before there was any non-compliance with the condition precedent.
Lloyd LJ said: l ‘the principles on which one insurer is entitled to recover from another in a case of double insurance have been settled since Lord Mansfield’s day’.
Lloyd LJ
Gazette 15-Jan-1992, [1992] QB 887, [1992] 2 WLR 157, [1992] 1 All ER 283, [1991] 2 Lloyds Rep 36
England and Wales
Cited by:
Not FollowedEagle Star Insurance Co Ltd v Provincial Insurance Plc PC 24-May-1993
Two insurance companies were liable to contribute equally to an amount payable to a third party. The doctrine of contribution could be modified by contract and the matter should be considered by reference to the parties’ contractual liabilities. . .
CitedBolton Metropolitan Borough Council v Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd CA 6-Feb-2006
The deceased had come into contact with asbestos when working on building sites for more than one contractor. The claimant here sought contribution from the defendants for the damages it had paid to his estate. The issue was as to liability on . .
CitedThe National Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Society Ltd v HSBC Insurance (UK) Ltd ComC 19-Apr-2010
Gavin Kealey QC DHCJ set out the concept of double insurance: ‘Double insurance arises where the same party is insured with two (or more) insurers in respect of the same interest on the same subject-matter against the same risks. If a loss by a . .
CitedZurich Insurance Plc UK Branch v International Energy Group Ltd SC 20-May-2015
A claim had been made for mesothelioma following exposure to asbestos, but the claim arose in Guernsey. Acknowledging the acute difficultis particular to the evidence in such cases, the House of Lords, in Fairchild. had introduced the Special Rule . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.83017

UK Acorn Finance Ltd v Markel (UK) Ltd: ComC 21 Apr 2020

Claim brought under section 1(1) and (4) of the Third Party (Rights Against Insurers) Act 1930 by which it seeks to recover an indemnity in respect of two judgments, being a judgment for pounds 385,187.32 and a further judgment for pounds 12,882,713.49, obtained by it against Westoe 19 Limited under professional indemnity policies underwritten by the defendant.
Defendant avoiding policies.
HH Judge Pelling QC
[2020] EWHC 922 (Comm)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 13 October 2021; Ref: scu.651161

Feasey v Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada and Another: Steamship Mutual Underwriting Association (Bermuda) Ltd v Feasey: ComC 17 May 2002

The fact that there was more than one insurance policy in place for the same interest would not preclude a claim under one of them. A mutual underwriting group insured members against personal injury and so forth through ‘lineslip’ policies. The insurance company declined to pay out under the Act.
Held: The purpose of the Act was to prevent gaming with life policies, by ensuring that the policy owner had an interest in the event insured. The court should consider only whether the insurable interest it had found for section 1, had been insured in a manner which could be characterized as gaming or wagering at the time of the insurance contract.
Mr Justice Langley
Times 17-Jun-2002, Gazette 11-Jul-2002, [2002] EWHC 868 (Commercial), [2002] Lloyd’s Rep IR 807, [2002] 2 All ER (Comm) 492
Bailii
Life Assurance Act 1774 1 2
England and Wales
Citing:
AppliedDalby v The India and London Life Assurance Company 1854
An insurance company (Anchor) had taken out insurance with the defendant on the life of the Duke of Cambridge in the sum of pounds 1000 for which it paid a yearly premium during the life of the Duke. Anchor had itself granted policies of insurance . .
DistinguishedHebdon v West 1863
Hebdon claimed under a policy with ILA in the sum of pounds 2500 on the life of X. Hebdon was employed in a bank of which X was the senior and managing partner. In 1855 Hebdon was employed on a seven-year contract at pounds 600 a year. He also owed . .
Appealed toFeasey v Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada and Another: Steamship Mutual Underwriting Association (Bermuda) Ltd v Feasey CA 26-Jun-2003
A policy providing a fixed level of benefit, calculated according to the degree of injury could not be avoided under the 1744 Act on the basis that the insured had no insurable interest. The insurance company said the company had no insurable . .
CitedLucena v Craufurd HL 1806
Before the declaration of war, against the United Provinces, His Majesty’s ships took possession of several ships belonging to Dutch East India men, and took them to St Helena. The Commissioners then insured the ships for their journey from St . .
CitedPaterson v Powell 1832
The purpose of the 1774 Act was to prevent ‘gaming’ in the disguise of insurance and in the sense of gambling on the outcome of an uncertain event in which the ‘assured’ had no interest save for the interest created by the very gamble or agreement . .
CitedStock v Inglis CA 1884
Buyers of sugar to whom the risk of loss of the sugar but not the property in it had passed had an insurable interest.
Held: ‘Nobody can deny that this is a case of extreme difficulty and of great nicety. In my opinion it is the duty of a . .
CitedMacaura v Northern Assurance Company Limited HL 1925
Macaura owned the large majority of shares in a limited company, trading in timber. The company also owed him substantial sums. He kept on the insurance of timber and other assets within the business but in his own name. When he came to claim, his . .
CitedMark Rowlands v Berni Inns Ltd CA 1985
The plaintiff owned the freehold and had let the basement to the defendant. The plaintiff insured the building. The defendant covenanted to pay to the plaintiff an insurance rent equal to the proportionate cost of insuring the part of the building . .
CitedDeepak Fertilisers v ICI Chemicals CA 1991
P’s methanol plant had been constructed with the use of know-how and services supplied by D. Following completion the plant exploded. The plaintiff sued D for negligence and breach of contract. The plaintiff had undertaken to indemnify D against . .
CitedSharp v Sphere Drake Insurance plc (The Moonacre) 1992
S, a retired businessman, had bought a vessel and insured it in his name, but registered it in the name of company, R. In the winter, the boat was laid up, but occupied by a workman who maintained it and kept it secure. The boat was destroyed by a . .
CitedSiu Yin Kwan and Another v Eastern Insurance Co Ltd PC 16-Dec-1993
Insurers are liable to undisclosed principals on an indemnity policy, provided it was made with the range of their authority. The claim arose out of the death of two seamen on their employers’ vessel but the employers were not named in the relevant . .
CitedAnderson v Morice 1875
A purchaser of a cargo was held to have no insurable interest in the cargo itself until the risk had passed to him on completion of loading. The only possible insurable interest was on the profits from sale of the cargo but not on the cargo itself . .
CitedGlengate-KG Properties Ltd v Norwich Union Fire Insurance Society Ltd and Others CA 12-Jan-1996
NU the insurer of a consequential loss insurance policy, appealed against the decision, on a claim brought by G, the owners of a property under redevelopment, which had suffered a fire as to G’s resultant loss of rental income from the property. The . .

Cited by:
Appeal fromFeasey v Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada and Another: Steamship Mutual Underwriting Association (Bermuda) Ltd v Feasey CA 26-Jun-2003
A policy providing a fixed level of benefit, calculated according to the degree of injury could not be avoided under the 1744 Act on the basis that the insured had no insurable interest. The insurance company said the company had no insurable . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 October 2021; Ref: scu.173989

Wood v Woad: CEC 1 Jun 1874

Declaration, alleging that the plaintiff was a member of a mutual insurance society, which insured members against losses to ships entered and insured in the books of the society, on a deposit being made of 5l. per cent, on the amount insured ; that the defendants were the committee of the society, by the rules of which they had the entire control of the funds and affairs of the society, and were to determine on the admission or rejection of ships insured or proposed for insurance; that by another rule, ‘if the committee shall at any time deem the conduct of any member suspicious, or that such member is for any other reason unworthy of remaining in this society, they shall have full power to exclude such member, by directing the secretary to give such member notice in writing that the committee have excluded such member from the society, and, after the giving of such notice, such member shall be excluded, and have no claim or be responsible for or in respect of any loss or damage happening after such notice ; ‘ that the plaintiff, as such member, had entered a ship on the books of the society, and had paid the deposit, and was thereupon entitled to an indemnity for loss happening to the ship ; that the defendants, well knowing the premises, but ‘wrongfully, collusively, and improperly contriving to deprive the plaintiff of the benefit of such indemnity, did wrongfully, collusively, and improperly expel the plaintiff from the society on the alleged ground that his conduct was suspicious, or that he was for some reason unworthy of remaining in the society, without giving the plaintiff, or any person on his behalf, any opportunity whatsoever of being heard before them, and without, in fact, hearing the plaintiff, or any person on his behalf, in defence and vindication of the plaintiff’s conduct as a member of the society with reference to the said ground of expulsion ‘; whereby the plaintiff lost the benefit of an indemnity for damage which his ship subsequently sustained, and was otherwise damnified. Demurrer.
Held: that the declaration shewed no cause of action.
By Kelly, C.B., Pollock and Amphlett, BB. (following Blisset v. Daniel, 10 Hare, 493), on the ground that, assuming the allegations of the declaration to be true, the act of the defendants in expelling the plaintiff without giving him an opportunity of being heard was void ; that the plaintiff, therefore, still remained a member of the society, and had sustained no damage.
By Cleasby and Pollock, BB., on the ground that the declaration did not sufficiently charge mala fides.
Quaere, by Cleasby and Amphlett, BB., whether any action would lie against the defendants for acts done by them in the discharge of their functions as members of the committee.
Kelly CB said of audi alteram partem: ‘This rule is not confined to the conduct of strictly legal tribunals, but is applicable to every tribunal or body of persons invested with authority to adjudicate upon matters involving civil consequences to individuals’.
Kelly CB
[1874] UKLawRpExch 26, (1873-1874) LR 9 Exch 190
Commonlii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedBlisset v Daniel 1853
The court considered the limits on a power of expulsion from a partnership.
Held: (Page-Wood V-C) Construing the articles, two-thirds of the partners could expel a partner by serving a notice upon him without holding any meeting or giving any . .

Cited by:
CitedRidge v Baldwin (No 1) HL 14-Mar-1963
No Condemnation Without Opportunity For Defence
Ridge, a Chief Constable, had been wrongfully dismissed because he was not given the opportunity of presenting his defence. He had been acquitted of the charges brought against him, but the judge at trial had made adverse comments about his . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 October 2021; Ref: scu.653098

Phoenix General Insurance Co of Greece SA v Halvanon Insurance Co Ltd: ChD 1985

The court was asked to consider preliminary issues concerning facultative obligatory (fac. oblig.) reinsurances of a variety of business. The issues included whether the reinsured was obliged to keep a retention and whether the writing of its business was subject to implied terms. Both parties were suggesting that terms were to be implied.
Held: Hobhouse J accepted an implied term into contracts of reinsurance, which extended to the obligation to keep proper accounting records and to make them reasonably available to reinsurers as being something which ‘would probably be imported anyway by the duty of good faith’.
Hobhouse J set out the pleaded implied terms and said: ‘The implication of these terms was not controversial before me. Both [expert] witnesses thought them appropriate. Even though the opinion of the witnesses as to what is appropriate and reasonable does not itself suffice to show that such terms should be implied, I am satisfied that such terms are necessary in the present transactions. The fac. oblig. nature of the transaction which imposes no restriction on the reassured’s right to chose whether to cede or not to cede, without giving the reinsurer any equivalent right, does necessitate that the reinsured should accept the obligation to conduct the business involved in the cession prudently, reasonably carefully and in accordance with the ordinary practice of the market. In the general formulation the word ‘reasonable’ is to be preferred to ‘due’ and the duty to act prudently as if not reinsured is not an alternative but it is really a restatement of the same obligation, provided it is realised that the obligation does not preclude the plaintiffs from taking into account the added capacity to write business that the availability of the reinsurances give them. Such is, after all, one of the important purposes of any reinsurance. In general terms, it must also be pointed out that the overrider commission being paid to the plaintiffs in part specifically covers the cost of carrying out these obligations.’
Hobhouse J
[1985] 2 Lloyds Rep 599
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedToomey v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd CA 1994
The word ‘reinsurance’ is often used loosely simply to describe any contract of insurance which is placed by or for the benefit of an insurer, but it should be construed more properly to require the insurance of an insurable interest in the subject . .
CitedDigital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd and Another v Financial Services Authority SC 13-Feb-2013
The appellants challenged an order for the dissolution of their company under the 2000 Acts. They had provided warranties for assorted consumer electrical goods which amounted to insurance, but said that they were not required to be registered under . .
CitedRe Digital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd and Others ChD 31-Jan-2011
The Financial Services Authority sought public interest orders for the winding up of three companies selling, it said, extended warranty cover plans without authorisation. The companies said that authorisation was not required, since only services . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 October 2021; Ref: scu.470965

Prudential Assurance Company Ltd v Bibby (Inspector of Taxes): ChD 24 Jul 1999

Charges on income are not first to be deducted before computing relevant profits of a company carrying on life assurance business under the Act. This allows such companies to set such charges against the balance of profits chargeable to corporation tax at the full rate, and not merely at the rate set for the policy holders’ share.
Times 24-Jul-1999
Finance Act 1989 88(3)
England and Wales
Cited by:
See AlsoBibby (Inspector of Taxes) v Prudential Assurance Co Ltd; Oakes (Inspector of Taxes) v Equitable Life Assurance Society ChD 17-May-2000
A life insurance company which sold its ‘own purchase shares’ was not prevented by the section from reclaiming the tax credits on associated income distributions. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 October 2021; Ref: scu.85068

Marshall v The Emperor Life Assurance Society: QBD 13 Nov 1865

To a declaration on a policy of life insurance the defendant pleaded, that the proposal, the basis of the policy, declared the life insured had not had any symptoms of certain enumerated diseases, or any other complaint, whereas he had had symptoms of disease of the stomach.
The Court ordered particulars to be
delivered of the symptoms of the disease alleged.
[1865] EngR 728, (1865) 6 B and S 886, (1865) 122 ER 1420, (1865-1866) LR 1 QB 35, [1865] UKLawRpKQB 15
Commonlii, Commonlii
England and Wales

Updated: 30 September 2021; Ref: scu.281640

Rayner and Another v Ritson: QBD 14 Nov 1865

Inspection of documents. 14 and 15 Vict. c. 99, S. 6. Marine Insurance. Action on policy. – In an action on a policy of marine insurance for a constructive total loss the defendant is entitled, both under the old practice and the Statute 14 and 15 Vict c. 99, s 6, to an inspection of all papers iii the possession of the Plaintiff relative to the matters in issue, including letters between the captain and the plaintiff.
[1865] EngR 730, (1865) 6 B and S 888, (1865) 122 ER 1421
Commonlii
England and Wales

Updated: 29 September 2021; Ref: scu.281642

Bee v Jenson: CA 13 Sep 2007

The claimant hired a car whilst his own, damaged by the defendant, was being repaired. His insurer sought to recover the cost from the other driver. The insurer had first arranged te hire with one company, but then another provided a finacial reward to switch to it. The policy provided that a second insurance company would cover legal expenses and arrange the hire of a replacement vehicle (all as a provision of the original insurance to which the 1974 Act would not apply). The defendant said this arrangement was ineffective in law, since the claimant himself was not liable for the cost of the hire.
Held: The defendant’s argument failed. Mr Bee was entitled to recover the reasonable cost of hire even though, having been fully indemnified, he would hold that sum for the benefit of DAS.
Tuckey LJ, Longmore LJ, Sir Paul Kennedy
[2007] EWCA Civ 923, Times 17-Oct-2008, [2007] 4 All ER 791
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedGiles v Thompson, Devlin v Baslington (Conjoined Appeals) HL 1-Jun-1993
Car hire companies who pursued actions in motorists’ names to recover the costs of hiring a replacement vehicle after an accident, from negligent drivers, were not acting in a champertous and unlawful manner. Lord Mustill said: ‘there exists in . .
CitedBradburn v Great Western Rail Co CEC 1874
The plaintiff had received a sum of money from a private insurer to compensate him for lost income as a result of an accident caused by the negligence of the defendant.
Held: He was entitled to full damages as well as the payment from the . .
CitedDimond v Lovell HL 12-May-2000
A claimant sought as part of her damages for the cost of hiring a care whilst her own was off the road after an accident caused by the defendant. She agreed with a hire company to hire a car, but payment was delayed until the claim was settled.
CitedLagden v O’Connor HL 4-Dec-2003
The parties had been involved in a road traffic accident. The defendant drove into the claimant’s parked car. The claimant was unable to afford to hire a car pending repairs being completed, and arranged to hire a car on credit. He now sought . .
CitedAlexander v Rolls Royce Ltd CA 1996
The claimant was not entitled to damages for loss of enjoyment in the use of his Rolls Royce whilst it was off the road after an accident. . .
CitedBrown v Davis and Galbraith 1972
The garage, had negotiated with the insurers and entered into a written agreement with them on their printed forms to repair cars of the insured clients. When the insurer failed, they sought to recover payment from the car owners.
Held: The . .
CitedAdams v London Motor Builders 1921
A plaintiff whose claim was being supported and paid for by a trade union was nevertheless liable to the solicitor instructed by the Union for that solicitor’s costs. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 September 2021; Ref: scu.259316