Insurance: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
(Make page HTTPS) |
||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
'''Versloot Dredging BV & Anor v HDI Gerling Industrie Versicherung AG & Ors, the “DC MERWESTONE”''' | '''Versloot Dredging BV & Anor v HDI Gerling Industrie Versicherung AG & Ors, the “DC MERWESTONE”''' | ||
[[ | [[https://www.onlinedmc.co.uk/index.php/Versloot_Dredging_v_HDI_Gerling_Industrie_Versicherung_-_the_DC_Merwestone]] | ||
'''Supreme Court; Lords Mance, Clarke, Sumption, Hughes, Toulson; [2016] UKSC 45; 20 July 2016''' | '''Supreme Court; Lords Mance, Clarke, Sumption, Hughes, Toulson; [2016] UKSC 45; 20 July 2016''' | ||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
'''Versloot Dredging BV & Anor v HDI Gerling Industrie Versicherung AG & Ors – the D C Merwestone''' | '''Versloot Dredging BV & Anor v HDI Gerling Industrie Versicherung AG & Ors – the D C Merwestone''' | ||
'''[2014] EWCA Civ 1349: Clarke and Vos LLJ and Sir Timothy Lloyd: 16 October 2014:[[ | '''[2014] EWCA Civ 1349: Clarke and Vos LLJ and Sir Timothy Lloyd: 16 October 2014:[[https://www.onlinedmc.co.uk/index.php/Versloot_Dredging_v_HDI_Gerling_Industrie_Versicherung_-_The_D_C_Merwestone]]''' | ||
'''MARINE INSURANCE: WHETHER OTHERWISE VALID CLAIM BY OWNERS FORFEIT DUE TO OWNERS' FRAUDULENT DEVICE: WHETHER DEFENCE OF FRAUDULENT DEVICE: CONTRARY TO ARTICLE 1 OF THE FIRST PROTOCOL TO THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS EFFECTED IN ENGLISH LAW BY THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998''' | '''MARINE INSURANCE: WHETHER OTHERWISE VALID CLAIM BY OWNERS FORFEIT DUE TO OWNERS' FRAUDULENT DEVICE: WHETHER DEFENCE OF FRAUDULENT DEVICE: CONTRARY TO ARTICLE 1 OF THE FIRST PROTOCOL TO THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS EFFECTED IN ENGLISH LAW BY THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998''' | ||
Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
'''Hua Tyan Development Ltd v Zurich Insurance Co Ltd''' | '''Hua Tyan Development Ltd v Zurich Insurance Co Ltd''' | ||
'''Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal: Ma CJ, Ribeiro, Tang, Fok PJJ and Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury NPJ: FACV No.18 of 2013: (2014) 17 HKCFAR 493: 10 September 2014[[ | '''Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal: Ma CJ, Ribeiro, Tang, Fok PJJ and Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury NPJ: FACV No.18 of 2013: (2014) 17 HKCFAR 493: 10 September 2014[[https://www.onlinedmc.co.uk/index.php/Hua_Tyan_Development_v_Zurich_Insurance_Co]]''' | ||
'''MARINE INSURANCE: DEADWEIGHT WARRANTY: BREACH OF WARRANTY DESPITE NAMED VESSEL WAS STATED TO BE “APPROVED VESSEL”: NO ACTUAL OR CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE BY INSURER OF DEADWEIGHT CAPACITY OF VESSEL: NO WAIVER BY INSURER: RECTIFICATION OF CONTRACT REFUSED''' | '''MARINE INSURANCE: DEADWEIGHT WARRANTY: BREACH OF WARRANTY DESPITE NAMED VESSEL WAS STATED TO BE “APPROVED VESSEL”: NO ACTUAL OR CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE BY INSURER OF DEADWEIGHT CAPACITY OF VESSEL: NO WAIVER BY INSURER: RECTIFICATION OF CONTRACT REFUSED''' | ||
Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
'''Versloot Dredging BV & Anor v HDI Gerling Industrie Versicherung AG & Ors''' | '''Versloot Dredging BV & Anor v HDI Gerling Industrie Versicherung AG & Ors''' | ||
'''English High Court: Queen’s Bench Division: Commercial Court; Popplewell J; [2013] EWHC 1667 (Comm); 14 June 2013:[[ | '''English High Court: Queen’s Bench Division: Commercial Court; Popplewell J; [2013] EWHC 1667 (Comm); 14 June 2013:[[https://www.onlinedmc.co.uk/index.php/Versloot_Dredging_v_HDI_Gerling_Industrie_Versicherung]]''' | ||
'''MARINE INSURANCE: WHETHER CLAIM BY OWNERS WAS AN INSURED PERIL: WHETHER OTHERWISE VALID CLAIM BY OWNERS FORFEIT DUE TO OWNERS' FRAUDULENT DEVICE: ELEMENTS OF DEFENCE OF FRAUDULENT DEVICE: APPLICATION OF DEFENCE OF FRAUDULENT DEVICE''' | '''MARINE INSURANCE: WHETHER CLAIM BY OWNERS WAS AN INSURED PERIL: WHETHER OTHERWISE VALID CLAIM BY OWNERS FORFEIT DUE TO OWNERS' FRAUDULENT DEVICE: ELEMENTS OF DEFENCE OF FRAUDULENT DEVICE: APPLICATION OF DEFENCE OF FRAUDULENT DEVICE''' | ||
Line 52: | Line 52: | ||
'''English High Court; Blair J; [2012] EWHC 50 (Comm); 20 January 2012''' | '''English High Court; Blair J; [2012] EWHC 50 (Comm); 20 January 2012''' | ||
'''English Court of Appeal; Gross, Tomlinson, and Pill LJJ; [2012] EWCA Civ 1625; 14 December 2012:[[ | '''English Court of Appeal; Gross, Tomlinson, and Pill LJJ; [2012] EWCA Civ 1625; 14 December 2012:[[https://www.onlinedmc.co.uk/index.php/Sealion_Shipping_v_Valiant_Insurance_-_The_Toisa_Pisces]]''' | ||
'''MARINE INSURANCE: CAUSATION/‘ANY ONE OCCURRENCE’: INCHMAREE CLAUSE DUE DILIGENCE PROVISO''' | '''MARINE INSURANCE: CAUSATION/‘ANY ONE OCCURRENCE’: INCHMAREE CLAUSE DUE DILIGENCE PROVISO''' | ||
Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
'''Syarikat Takaful Malaysia Berhad v. Global Process Systems Inc & Anor''' | '''Syarikat Takaful Malaysia Berhad v. Global Process Systems Inc & Anor''' | ||
'''United Kindgom Supreme Court: Lords Mance, Collins, Clarke, Dyson, and Saville: [2011] UKSC 5: 1 February 2011: [[ | '''United Kindgom Supreme Court: Lords Mance, Collins, Clarke, Dyson, and Saville: [2011] UKSC 5: 1 February 2011: [[https://www.onlinedmc.co.uk/index.php/Syarikat_Takaful_Malaysia_v_Global_Process_ Systems]]''' | ||
'''MARINE INSURANCE: CAUSATION: WHETHER LEGS OF OIL RIG FALLING OFF DURING VOYAGE CAUSED BY PERILS OF SEA OR INHERENT VICE: s.55(2)(c) MARINE INSURANCE ACT 1906 : s.55(1) MARINE INSURANCE ACT 1906''' | '''MARINE INSURANCE: CAUSATION: WHETHER LEGS OF OIL RIG FALLING OFF DURING VOYAGE CAUSED BY PERILS OF SEA OR INHERENT VICE: s.55(2)(c) MARINE INSURANCE ACT 1906 : s.55(1) MARINE INSURANCE ACT 1906''' | ||
Line 74: | Line 74: | ||
'''Melinda Holdings SA v. Hellenic Mutual War Risks Association (Bermuda) Ltd.''' | '''Melinda Holdings SA v. Hellenic Mutual War Risks Association (Bermuda) Ltd.''' | ||
'''English High Court; Burton J; [2011] EWHC 181 (Comm), 18 February 2011: [[ | '''English High Court; Burton J; [2011] EWHC 181 (Comm), 18 February 2011: [[https://www.onlinedmc.co.uk/index.php/Melinda_Holdings_v_Hellenic_Mutual]]''' | ||
'''WAR RISKS INSURANCE: EXCLUDED CAUSES: ORDINARY JUDICIAL PROCESS: INSURED’S OBLIGATION TO SUE AND LABOUR: STANDARD OF PROOF''' | '''WAR RISKS INSURANCE: EXCLUDED CAUSES: ORDINARY JUDICIAL PROCESS: INSURED’S OBLIGATION TO SUE AND LABOUR: STANDARD OF PROOF''' | ||
Line 85: | Line 85: | ||
'''Wasa International Insurance Co Ltd v Lexington Insurance Co; AGF Insurance Ltd v Lexington Insurance Co''' | '''Wasa International Insurance Co Ltd v Lexington Insurance Co; AGF Insurance Ltd v Lexington Insurance Co''' | ||
'''House of Lords: Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers , Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe , Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood , Lord Mance , Lord Collins of Mapesbury: [2009] UKHL 40: [[ | '''House of Lords: Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers , Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe , Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood , Lord Mance , Lord Collins of Mapesbury: [2009] UKHL 40: [[https://www.onlinedmc.co.uk/index.php/Wasa_Insurance_v_Lexington_Insurance]]''' | ||
'''INSURANCE: NO GOVERNING LAW EXPRESSED IN THE POLICY: FACULTATIVE REINSURANCE SUBJECT TO ENGLISH LAW: WHETHER PERIOD OF COVER TO BE CONSTRUED AS BACK TO BACK WITH THE UNDERLYING INSURANCE, AS INTERPRETED BY FOREIGN COURT''' | '''INSURANCE: NO GOVERNING LAW EXPRESSED IN THE POLICY: FACULTATIVE REINSURANCE SUBJECT TO ENGLISH LAW: WHETHER PERIOD OF COVER TO BE CONSTRUED AS BACK TO BACK WITH THE UNDERLYING INSURANCE, AS INTERPRETED BY FOREIGN COURT''' | ||
Line 96: | Line 96: | ||
'''Masefield AG v Amlin Corporate Member Ltd''' | '''Masefield AG v Amlin Corporate Member Ltd''' | ||
'''[2011] EWCA Civ 24: Court of Appeal, Civil Division: Rix, Moore-Bick and Patten LJJ: 26January 2011: [[ | '''[2011] EWCA Civ 24: Court of Appeal, Civil Division: Rix, Moore-Bick and Patten LJJ: 26January 2011: [[https://www.onlinedmc.co.uk/index.php/Masefield_AG_v_Amlin]]''' | ||
'''MARINE CARGO INSURANCE: VESSEL, CREW AND CARGO TAKEN BY PIRATES, LATER RELEASED ON PAYMENT OF RANSOM: NOTICE OF ABANDONMENT: CLAIM THAT ASSURED IRRETRIEVABLY DEPRIVED OF CARGO: WHETHER CARGO AN ACTUAL TOTAL LOSS UNDER s.57(1) MARINE INSURANCE ACT 1906: WHETHER PAYMENT OF RANSOM CONTRARY TO PUBLIC POLICY''' | '''MARINE CARGO INSURANCE: VESSEL, CREW AND CARGO TAKEN BY PIRATES, LATER RELEASED ON PAYMENT OF RANSOM: NOTICE OF ABANDONMENT: CLAIM THAT ASSURED IRRETRIEVABLY DEPRIVED OF CARGO: WHETHER CARGO AN ACTUAL TOTAL LOSS UNDER s.57(1) MARINE INSURANCE ACT 1906: WHETHER PAYMENT OF RANSOM CONTRARY TO PUBLIC POLICY''' | ||
Line 105: | Line 105: | ||
'''English High Court''' | '''English High Court''' | ||
'''Masefield AG -v- Amlin Corporate Member Ltd [2010] EWHC 280 (Comm): David Steel J.: 18 February 2010'''[[ | '''Masefield AG -v- Amlin Corporate Member Ltd [2010] EWHC 280 (Comm): David Steel J.: 18 February 2010'''[[https://www.onlinedmc.co.uk/index.php/Masefield_v_Amlin]] | ||
'''MARINE CARGO INSURANCE: VESSEL, CREW AND CARGO TAKEN BY PIRATES, THEN RELEASED ON PAYMENT OF RANSOM: NOTICE OF ABANDONMENT: CLAIM THAT ASSURED IRRETRIEVABLY DEPRIVED OF CARGO: WHETHER CARGO AN ACTUAL TOTAL LOSS UNDER s.57(1) MARINE INSURANCE ACT 1906: WHETHER CARGO A CONSTRUCTIVE TOTAL LOSS UNDER s.60(1): PIRACY: POSSESSION: WHETHER PAYMENT OF RANSOM CONTRARY TO PUBLIC POLICY''' | '''MARINE CARGO INSURANCE: VESSEL, CREW AND CARGO TAKEN BY PIRATES, THEN RELEASED ON PAYMENT OF RANSOM: NOTICE OF ABANDONMENT: CLAIM THAT ASSURED IRRETRIEVABLY DEPRIVED OF CARGO: WHETHER CARGO AN ACTUAL TOTAL LOSS UNDER s.57(1) MARINE INSURANCE ACT 1906: WHETHER CARGO A CONSTRUCTIVE TOTAL LOSS UNDER s.60(1): PIRACY: POSSESSION: WHETHER PAYMENT OF RANSOM CONTRARY TO PUBLIC POLICY''' |
Revision as of 16:09, 8 October 2018
DMC/INS/16/01
England
Versloot Dredging BV & Anor v HDI Gerling Industrie Versicherung AG & Ors, the “DC MERWESTONE” [[1]]
Supreme Court; Lords Mance, Clarke, Sumption, Hughes, Toulson; [2016] UKSC 45; 20 July 2016
INSURANCE: FRAUDULENT CLAIMS RULE; “COLLATERAL LIE”/“FRAUDULENT DEVICE” DOES NOT DEFEAT OTHERWISE VALID INSURANCE CLAIM
DMC/INS/15/02
England
Versloot Dredging BV & Anor v HDI Gerling Industrie Versicherung AG & Ors – the D C Merwestone
[2014] EWCA Civ 1349: Clarke and Vos LLJ and Sir Timothy Lloyd: 16 October 2014:[[2]]
MARINE INSURANCE: WHETHER OTHERWISE VALID CLAIM BY OWNERS FORFEIT DUE TO OWNERS' FRAUDULENT DEVICE: WHETHER DEFENCE OF FRAUDULENT DEVICE: CONTRARY TO ARTICLE 1 OF THE FIRST PROTOCOL TO THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS EFFECTED IN ENGLISH LAW BY THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998
DMC/Ins/15/01
Hong Kong
Hua Tyan Development Ltd v Zurich Insurance Co Ltd
Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal: Ma CJ, Ribeiro, Tang, Fok PJJ and Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury NPJ: FACV No.18 of 2013: (2014) 17 HKCFAR 493: 10 September 2014[[3]]
MARINE INSURANCE: DEADWEIGHT WARRANTY: BREACH OF WARRANTY DESPITE NAMED VESSEL WAS STATED TO BE “APPROVED VESSEL”: NO ACTUAL OR CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE BY INSURER OF DEADWEIGHT CAPACITY OF VESSEL: NO WAIVER BY INSURER: RECTIFICATION OF CONTRACT REFUSED
DMC/INS/13/02
England
Versloot Dredging BV & Anor v HDI Gerling Industrie Versicherung AG & Ors
English High Court: Queen’s Bench Division: Commercial Court; Popplewell J; [2013] EWHC 1667 (Comm); 14 June 2013:[[4]]
MARINE INSURANCE: WHETHER CLAIM BY OWNERS WAS AN INSURED PERIL: WHETHER OTHERWISE VALID CLAIM BY OWNERS FORFEIT DUE TO OWNERS' FRAUDULENT DEVICE: ELEMENTS OF DEFENCE OF FRAUDULENT DEVICE: APPLICATION OF DEFENCE OF FRAUDULENT DEVICE
DMC/INS/13/01
England
Sealion Shipping Limited and Toisa Horizon Inc v Valiant Insurance Company: The MV “Toisa Pisces”
English High Court; Blair J; [2012] EWHC 50 (Comm); 20 January 2012
English Court of Appeal; Gross, Tomlinson, and Pill LJJ; [2012] EWCA Civ 1625; 14 December 2012:[[5]]
MARINE INSURANCE: CAUSATION/‘ANY ONE OCCURRENCE’: INCHMAREE CLAUSE DUE DILIGENCE PROVISO
DMC/INS/11/04
United Kingdom
Syarikat Takaful Malaysia Berhad v. Global Process Systems Inc & Anor
United Kindgom Supreme Court: Lords Mance, Collins, Clarke, Dyson, and Saville: [2011] UKSC 5: 1 February 2011: [Systems]
MARINE INSURANCE: CAUSATION: WHETHER LEGS OF OIL RIG FALLING OFF DURING VOYAGE CAUSED BY PERILS OF SEA OR INHERENT VICE: s.55(2)(c) MARINE INSURANCE ACT 1906 : s.55(1) MARINE INSURANCE ACT 1906
DMC/INS/11/03
England
Melinda Holdings SA v. Hellenic Mutual War Risks Association (Bermuda) Ltd.
English High Court; Burton J; [2011] EWHC 181 (Comm), 18 February 2011: [[6]]
WAR RISKS INSURANCE: EXCLUDED CAUSES: ORDINARY JUDICIAL PROCESS: INSURED’S OBLIGATION TO SUE AND LABOUR: STANDARD OF PROOF
DMC/INS/11/02
United Kingdom
Wasa International Insurance Co Ltd v Lexington Insurance Co; AGF Insurance Ltd v Lexington Insurance Co
House of Lords: Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers , Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe , Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood , Lord Mance , Lord Collins of Mapesbury: [2009] UKHL 40: [[7]]
INSURANCE: NO GOVERNING LAW EXPRESSED IN THE POLICY: FACULTATIVE REINSURANCE SUBJECT TO ENGLISH LAW: WHETHER PERIOD OF COVER TO BE CONSTRUED AS BACK TO BACK WITH THE UNDERLYING INSURANCE, AS INTERPRETED BY FOREIGN COURT
DMC/SandT/11/01
English Court of Appeal
Masefield AG v Amlin Corporate Member Ltd
[2011] EWCA Civ 24: Court of Appeal, Civil Division: Rix, Moore-Bick and Patten LJJ: 26January 2011: [[8]]
MARINE CARGO INSURANCE: VESSEL, CREW AND CARGO TAKEN BY PIRATES, LATER RELEASED ON PAYMENT OF RANSOM: NOTICE OF ABANDONMENT: CLAIM THAT ASSURED IRRETRIEVABLY DEPRIVED OF CARGO: WHETHER CARGO AN ACTUAL TOTAL LOSS UNDER s.57(1) MARINE INSURANCE ACT 1906: WHETHER PAYMENT OF RANSOM CONTRARY TO PUBLIC POLICY
DMC/INS/10/02
English High Court
Masefield AG -v- Amlin Corporate Member Ltd [2010] EWHC 280 (Comm): David Steel J.: 18 February 2010[[9]]
MARINE CARGO INSURANCE: VESSEL, CREW AND CARGO TAKEN BY PIRATES, THEN RELEASED ON PAYMENT OF RANSOM: NOTICE OF ABANDONMENT: CLAIM THAT ASSURED IRRETRIEVABLY DEPRIVED OF CARGO: WHETHER CARGO AN ACTUAL TOTAL LOSS UNDER s.57(1) MARINE INSURANCE ACT 1906: WHETHER CARGO A CONSTRUCTIVE TOTAL LOSS UNDER s.60(1): PIRACY: POSSESSION: WHETHER PAYMENT OF RANSOM CONTRARY TO PUBLIC POLICY
DMC/INS/01/10
Lexington Insurance Company v AGF Insurance Limited; Lexington Insurance Company v Wasa International Insurance Company Limited
House of Lords: Lords Phillips, Walker, Brown, Mance and Collins: [2009] UKHL 40: 30 July 2009
REINSURANCE: PROPORTIONAL FACULTATIVE REINSURANCE POLICY: PHYSICAL LOSS AND DAMAGE TO PROPERTY: TEMORARAL SCOPE OF A TIME POLICY: WHETHER REINSURANCE POLICY IS TO BE CONSTRUED AS PROVIDING BACK-TO-BACK COVER WITH THE PRIMARY INSURANCE POLICY WHERE UNCERTAIN GOVERNING LAW OF INSURANCE POLICY PROVIDED WIDER SCOPE OF COVERAGE