material misrepresentation

The plaintiff insured instituted action against the defendant insurer, in relation to a claim arising from a fire on the insured farm (in May 2015) which the plaintiff alleged resulted in damage in the sum of around R14 million. The plaintiff’s insurance claim was rejected by the insurer in June 2016 on the grounds that

In this recent judgment the insurer unsuccessfully rejected policy liability on the basis of a material misrepresentation, alternatively, breach of a warranty.

Insurance had been obtained for a once-off all-risks transit cover for personal protective equipment face masks.

In proposing for the insurance, it was recorded that the transit would be done by professional third-party