SWEENEY v. KENNEDY.

(1948) 82 Ll.L.Rep. 294

EIRE.HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE.(DIVISIONAL COURT.)

Before Mr. Justice Haugh, Mr. Justice Dixon and Mr. Justice Kingsmill Moore.

Motor insurance-Proposal form-Answer - Warranty - Change of risk - Ambiguity - Contra proferentes doctrine -Proposal form for insurance of commercial vehicle completed by plaintiff -"Q. 9: Are any of your drivers under 21 years of age or with less than 12 months' driving experience? A.: No"-"I/we hereby agree that this declaration shall be held to be promissory, and so form the basis of the contract between me/us and the underwriters" -Meaning of "promissory" -Policy issued by defendant Lloyd's underwriter on Mar. 18, 1946-C. (third party) fatally injured on Oct. 7, 1947, during unloading of lorry covered by policy - Lorry being driven by plaintiff's son, who had been regularly employed as driver since Feb. 2, 1947.- Son with over 12 months' driving experience but under 21 years of age at time of accident - Action brought against plaintiff by dependants of C. - Claim by plaintiff for indemnity under policy - Liability denied by defendant on grounds (1) that employment of a driver under 21 years of age fundamentally altered character of risk; (2) that Q. 9 and the answer thereto amounted to a continuing warranty; and (3) that the declaration made by plaintiff amounted to an undertaking as to the future - Arbitration-Award that answer to Q. 9 was true when made; that subsequent employment by plaintiff of his son as driver did not render answer untrue; and that therefore plaintiff was entitled to indemnity by defendant- Case stated.