A claim for damage to a concrete pump fitted to a truck was denied by an Australian Supreme Court on the grounds of misrepresentation and nondisclosure regarding the pre-insurance unit’s history and a fraudulent claim in which pre-existing damage was denied.
The insured had owned the unit for some time but had not insured it
In this judgment the court considered the insured’s duty of disclosure and the insurers’ ability to avoid the policy under the relevant Australian legislation.
The question turned on what was called the Iraq File Note written in November 2010.The insurers contended that the contents should have been disclosed before renewal of the policy in 2011.
A US court found that the exclusion in an insurance policy against losses arising out of or involving a breach of contract or agreement did not exclude a claim resulting from a misrepresentation that induced the contract.
The insurer was excused from paying the amount of an arbitration award arising from a business dispute which
Where a seller had fraudulently failed to disclose a defective roof and sewerage system covered by buildings constructed without required statutory approval he was successfully sued in delict for fraudulent misrepresentation and fraudulent nondisclosure. Because the conduct was fraudulent the delictual claim defeated the voetstoots clause in the deed of sale as well as the
Insurers could not reject liability on the basis that the insured had deliberately or recklessly misrepresented his address when applying for insurance because there was no clear evidence about the precise wording of the questions which appeared on the computer screen at the time the online application was made.
Computer websites allowed the consumer to
A UK court has found that an insurer is entitled to avoid a policy where the insured had misrepresented the state of repair of the insured property and failed to disclose malicious acts and vandalism which had the effect of increasing the risk of fire in the property.
The insured, a mixed commercial and residential
In August 2017, the English Court of Appeal denied an appeal to a gynaecologist who was struck off the roll for practising without professional indemnity cover, which is compulsory in the UK.
The doctor, who had a substantial private practice, was uninsured for a period of 5 years between 2007 and 2012. Until 2002, he
A Pennsylvania court held that the insurer was not liable because of misrepresentation for a portion of a $227 million settlement by a building owner arising from a building collapse that took seven lives and injured 12 people.
The event happened as a result of an uncontrolled collapse of a four-storey building which was being
A US Supreme Court found that the insurer did not have to defend a motor dealership from a suit brought by an individual who alleged that the dealership had misrepresented that the car he bought had not previously been damaged.
The policy required the insurer to defend suits alleging tangible harm resulting from an accident.
In the USA a directors and officers policy issued to a man who later pleaded guilty to selling $1.9 million in phony stock was voided for non-disclosure.
The policy taken out and renewed included a policy application where the director stated he was unaware of any acts, errors or omissions that may be grounds for