An insurer in Singapore alleged that the insured had breached the obligation not to ‘make any admission in connection with any claim’ by pleading guilty to five charges of failing to comply with fire regulations. The defence was rejected on the basis that a person’s unfettered freedom of choice as to how to plead in criminal proceedings is highly important. Any restraint imposed on that freedom of choice by a condition in a contract is contrary to public policy and cannot be construed that way.
The court also held that a plea of guilty is not an ‘admission’ within the meaning of the condition. The offences were of strict liability and the plea of guilty did not imply negligence on the part of the insured.
The comments regarding a guilty plea in criminal proceedings not being an admission are good South African law.