Insurance Law Monthly

Motor insurance: damage to a vehicle on credit hire

Online Published Date : 19 July 2021 | Appeared in issue: Vol 33 No 7 - 19 July 2021

In Armstead v Royal & Sun Alliance Co Ltd 13May 2021, Recorder John Benson QC heard an appeal on the question of damagesrecoverable by the hirer of a vehicle where the vehicle is damaged in acollision due to the fault of another. There had been numerous county courtdecisions on the topic, and most had been decided in favour of the claimant,but this court was not bound by any of the decisions and considered the matterafresh.

The duty of fair presentation: materiality and inducement

Online Published Date : 19 July 2021 | Appeared in issue: Vol 33 No 7 - 19 July 2021

Zurich Insurance plc v Niramax Group Ltd[2021] EWCA Civ 590 was an appeal to the Court of Appeal from the firstinstance decision of Cockerill J. The case involved a variety of non-disclosuredefences 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 propertypolicy, it being contended that false statements made to the property insurerswere material to the plant policy.

Subrogation benefit of policy

Online Published Date : 19 July 2021 | Appeared in issue: Vol 33 No 7 - 19 July 2021

In Bank of New York Mellon (International) Ltd andOthers v Cine-UK Ltd and Others [2021] EWHC 1013 (QB) Master Dagnall had todetermine whether landlords were entitled to summary judgment on a claim againsttenant for rent following the closure of the leased premises during the Covid-19pandemic. Much of the argument turned upon whether the lease had required thelandlords to insure against loss of rent caused by non-physical perils.

Liability insurance: liability at law for damages or compensation

Online Published Date : 19 July 2021 | Appeared in issue: Vol 33 No 7 - 19 July 2021

In SAMetropolitan Fire Service v ACN 008 275 296 Pty [2020] SADC 45 the South Australian District Court discussed themeaning of the phrase “legally liable to pay for damages or compensation” in apublic liability policy. Following a series of well-known authorities, the courtconcluded that the policy responded only to an actionable breach of duty by theassured and did not cover no-fault statutory payments.