Insurance Law Monthly

The New Zealand High Court in Corbett v Vero Insurance New Zealand Ltd [2019] NZHC 1823 considered the distinction between “defect” and “damage” for the purposes of property cover. The decision of Fitzgerald J is of interest to the UK, as the court applied the ruling of the Court of Appeal in C A Blackwell (Contractors) Ltd v Gerling Allegemeine Verischerungs AG [2008] Lloyd’s Rep IR 529.

In Niramax Group Ltd v Zurich Insurance plc [2020] EWHC 535 (Comm) Cockerill J considered a variety of non-disclosure defences in respect of a policy on plant used in a waste recycling business. Most of the matters related to the placement of an entirely separate property policy, it being contended that failure to disclose matters relating to the property insurance were material to the plant policy.

For as long as the UK adheres to the Brussels Regulation Recast, European Parliament and Council Directive 1215/2012, assureds are in a privileged position as regards claims against insurers. In essence, an assured can sue in the courts of his home member state irrespective of the domicile of the insurer.

It was almost inevitable that the consecutive earthquakes occurring in New Zealand in 2010 and 2011 would give rise to aggregation issues. That has now happened, in the decision of Dunningham J in Moore v IAG New Zealand Ltd [2019] NZHC 1549.