Feasy v Sun Life Assurance Co of Canada [2003] EWCA Civ 885: “It is not a requirement of property insurance that the insured must have a ‘legal or equitable’ interest in the property as those terms might normally be understood. It is sufficient for a sub-contractor to have a contract that relates to the property and a potential liability for damage to the property to have an insurable interest in the property.” (Per Waller LJ)
Feasy v Sun Life Assurance Co of Canada [2003] EWCA Civ 885: “It is not a requirement of property insurance that the insured must have a ‘legal or equitable’ interest in the property as those terms might normally be understood. It is sufficient for a sub-contractor to have a contract that relates to the property and a potential liability for damage to the property to have an insurable interest in the property.” (Per Waller LJ)
utmost good faith = uberrima fides
utmost good faith = uberrima fides
Carter v Boehm (1766) 3 Burr 1905: “Insurance is a contract upon speculation. The special facts, upon which the contingent chance is to be computed, lie most commonly in the knowledge of the insured only...” (per Lord Mansfield)
s.17 Marine Insurance Act 1906: “A contract of marine insurance is a contract based upon the utmost good faith, and, if the utmost good faith be not observed by either party, the contract may be avoided by the other party.”
s.17 Marine Insurance Act 1906: “A contract of marine insurance is a contract based upon the utmost good faith, and, if the utmost good faith be not observed by either party, the contract may be avoided by the other party.”
s.18 Marine Insurance Act: “Subject to the provisions of this section, the assured must disclose to the insurer, before the contract is concluded, every material circumstance which is known to the assured… If the assured fails to make such disclosure, the insurer may avoid the contract.”
s.18 Marine Insurance Act: “Subject to the provisions of this section, the assured must disclose to the insurer, before the contract is concluded, every material circumstance which is known to the assured… If the assured fails to make such disclosure, the insurer may avoid the contract.”
Container Transport International Inc v Oceanus Mutual Underwriting Association (Bermuda) Ltd [1984] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 476: rejection of “decisive influence test”
Container Transport International Inc v Oceanus Mutual Underwriting Association (Bermuda) Ltd [1984] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 476: rejection of “decisive influence test”
Pan Atlantic Insurance Co v Pine Top Insurance Co [1995] 1 AC 501: requirement of “inducement”
