JDA CO LTD AND OTHERS v AIG INSURANCE NEW ZEALAND LTD AND OTHERS

[2021] NZHC 2912, New Zealand High Court, Justice Gault, 29 October 2021

Insurance (marine) – Declaration policy – Definition of “assured” under policy – Effect of assured’s failure to nominate terms of coverage – Estoppel by convention – Effect of failure to make proper declarations of insured subject matter – Breach of warranty

ATL, which owned an inspection depot for cars being exported from Japan, held an open cover for its customers to provide insurance for cars coming through its depot. The insurance attached when the assured obtained insurable interest, and declarations to the insurers were to be made monthly, so that the insurance was always in place before any declaration was made. The assured was ATL and any “customers ...for whom [ATL] are arranging insurance ...”. An assured had to elect for coverage either on Institute Cargo Clauses A (all risks) or Institute Cargo Clause B (named risks). There was a premium declaration clause under which the assured was to declare the number of vehicles within seven days at the end of each month. The claimants were not customers of ATL other than for the purposes of insurance, and vehicles belonging to them awaiting transportation from Japan were damaged by typhoons.