swarb.co.

uk
Law Forum Law Books

Home | lawindexpro | lawbytes | law-index | statutes | Law Books | Discuss Law | lip-cases | Contact Us

Top of Form

Search

Recent case law: Web www.swarb.co.uk Yemshaw -v- London Bottom of Form Borough of Hounslow | Victoria & Albert Museum Comprehensive information on no -v- Durrant | Commission for win no fee claims and Equality & Human Rights -vGriffin and Others | Progress the compensationprocess. Property Company Ltd -vMoorgarth Group Ltd |The Child Poverty Action Group -v- Secretary of State for Work and Pensions | Yerrakalva -vBarnsley Metropolitan Borough Council and Another | Okoro and Another -v- Taylor Woodrow Insurance - 1900- 1929 Construction Ltd and Others | Chaytor and Others, Insurance Law. Including Lloyds litigation. Regina -v- (Rev 2) | Spiller and Another -v- Joseph and The case shown here are derived from the lawindexpro case law Others | Webster -v- Regina database. lawindexpro is a low cost case law database, with over

From lawindexpro 260,000 case listings, and over 200,000 links to full text judgments. The free service below shows the core information on the case, but is restricted in several ways. A small proportion of cases do allow Adverts from Google: access to the full lawindexpro information. These cases are selected at random, and may be different on your next visit. The active links through to lawindexpro are extremely powerful allowing full access to all linked cases. This page lists 29 cases, and was prepared on 04 October 2010.

Victoria & Albert Museum -vDurrant | Yerrakalva -vBarnsley Metropolitan Borough Council and Another | Okoro and Another -v- Taylor Woodrow Construction Ltd and Others | Roberts -v- Acumed Ltd | Fecitt and Others -v- NHS Manchester | Tiffin -v- Lester Aldridge Llp |Gisda Cyf -vBarratt |Pricewaterhouse Coopers Llp -v- Popa | British Broadcasting Corporation -vHarpercollins Publishers Ltd and Another | JP Morgan Europe Ltd -v- Chweidan

Employment case law:

From lawindexpro

Re a Policy No 6402 of the Scottish Equitable Life Assurance Society [1902] 1 Ch 282 1902 Insurance, Trusts Casemap Mr Sanderson effected insurance on his 1 Cites Joyce J own life for the behoof of his sister-in- 1 Citers law, Miss Stiles. The policy moneys were payable to Miss Stiles or her personal representatives but the premiums were paid throughout by Mr Sanderson. The personal representatives of Mr Sanderson claimed the policy moneys from those of Miss Stiles to whom they had been paid. Held: Now, in the present case a policy was taken out by Mr. Sanderson a great

many years ago, and the name of Miss Stiles appears in the policy as the person to whom the money is to be paid. The policy was never handed to her, and she is now dead, and the premiums were always paid, and were paid for many years after her death, by Sanderson. That, really, is a case of a man taking a policy out in the name of another, that other person being a sister of his wife, and, therefore not standing in any relation to him that would meet the presumption, as Lord Eldon expressed it. It comes really to this: a purchase by one in the name of another with no other circumstances at all proved. Therefore, in my opinion, although the legal personal representative of the lady in this case would be the person entitled to receive the money at law and to give a receipt for it, in equity the money belongs to the legal personal representatives of Mr. Sanderson, who took out the policy.

Anderson -v- Martin [1907] 2 KB 253 1907 Insurance Casemap Takings at sea had been covered and the 1 Citers subjects of marine insurance--ships and cargoes--are properly treated as objects of war to be taken in prize or by way of reprisal: this was the meaning of the word 'capture' in marine insurance policies.

Andersen -v- Marten [1908] 1 KB 601 1908 Insurance Casemap CA 1 Citers The vessel was first taken captive and then lost. The insurer said that actual loss was caused by the capture, which was excepted. Held: The right to claim as a constructive total loss had not been affected.

Andersen -v- Marten [1908] AC 334 2 Jan 1908 Insurance

Casemap

HL

The ship was a total loss by capture before she became a wreck by perils of the seas.

1 Cites 1 Citers

Griffiths -v- Fleming [1909] 1 KB 805 1909 Insurance It is not uncommon for one partner to insure the life of another; or for two partners to insure the life of a third. A husband can be presumed to have an insurable interest in the life of his wife.

Casemap

Hunter -v- General Accident [1909] AC 404; 1909 SC (HL) 30; [1909] UKHL 2; 1909 2 SLT 99 29 Jun Scotland, Insurance, Contract 1909 HL Link[s] omitted

Wallis -v- Pratt [1911] AC 394 1911 Contract, Insurance HL

Casemap 1 Cites 1 Citers

Re Bradley and Essex and Suffolk Accident Indemnity Society [1912] 1 KB 415 1912 Insurance Casemap CA A policy provided an indemnity against 1 Citers Cozensemployer's liability under the 1906 Act, Hardy MR, but required employers to keep a wages Farwell LJ book and to notify the insurers of details of all remuneration paid during the period of insurance within one month from the end of the period, with provision for retrospective adjustment of the premium if the figures differed from those which had been used to calculate the original premium. The insurers repudiated liabilitysaying the insured, who was a small farmer with one employee, did not keep a wages book. The policy contained a clause providing that observance "of the

conditions of this policy" should be a condition precedent to insurer's liability. Held (by majority): Since the sole object of the condition was to provide for the adjustment of premiums, compliance with it was not a condition precedent to liability. The clause could not have been intended to refer to all the provisions of the policy as some were incapable of being conditions precedent. Having analysed the wages clause and held that parts of it were not so capable, he concluded that the condition: " is one and entire, and it is to my mind unreasonable to hold that one sentence in its middle is a condition precedent while the rest of the condition cannot be so considered. A policy of this nature, in case of ambiguity or doubt, ought to be construed against the office and in favour of the policy-holder, and it seems to me unreasonable to hold that the office can escape from all liability by reason only of the omission to duly record in a proper wages book the name of every employee and the amount of his wages. This is only required for the purpose of the statement which, by the proposal, the insured agreed to render at the end of each period of insurance. In my opinion, it ought not to be regarded as in any sense a condition precedent, and it follows that, in my opinion, the appeal fails and must be dismissed with costs." Farwell LJ, concurring, stated: "It is especially incumbent on insurance companies to make clear, both in their proposal forms and in their policies, the conditions which are precedent to their liability to pay, for such conditions have the same effect as forfeiture clauses, and may inflict loss and injury to the assured and those claiming under him out of all proportion to any damage that could possibly accrue to the company from non-observance or nonperformance of the conditions. Accordingly, it has been established that the doctrine that policies are to be

construed "contra proferentes" applies strongly against the company: In Re Etherington." Workmen's Compensation Act 1906

British Dominions General Insurance Co Ltd -vDuder [1915] 2 KB 394 1915 Insurance Casemap KBD The court was asked whether the insurers, 1 Citers Buckley LJ having settled the owners' claim for a constructive total loss at 66 per cent. of the sum insured could recover 100 per cent. from their re-insurers. Bailhache J. held that they could, with the result that the insurers would have made a profit out of the re-insurance. Held. The appeal succeeded. The contract of re-insurance is a contract of indemnity. Accordingly the insurers could not recover more than they had lost. In English law a contract of reinsurance in relation to property is a contract under which the reinsurers insure the property that is the subject of the primary insurance; it is not simply a contract under which the reinsurers agree to indemnify the insurers in relation to any liability that they may incur under the primary insurance. Buckley L.J said: "A contract of insurance and a contract of reinsurance, are independent of each other. But a contract of reinsurance is a contract which insures the thing originally insured, namely, the ship. The reinsurer has an insurable interest in the ship by virtue of his original contract of insurance. The thing insured, however, is the ship, and not the interest of the reinsurer in the ship by reason of his contract of insurance upon the ship." and "The plaintiffs are, however, entitled to indemnity, and this is not necessarily confined to the 66 per cent. They are entitled to such further sum, if any, as is required to give them an indemnity. The costs, for instance, of obtaining the compromise at 66 per cent.

should be added to the 66 per cent."

Jureidini -v- National British and Irish Millers Insurance Company Limited [1915] AC 499 1915 Insurance, Arbitration, Contract HL An insurance company disputed liability Viscount of a claim arising out of a fire, alleging 1 Citers Haldane, fraud and arson. These allegations were LC, Lord not sustained. The insurer then sought to Dunedin, resist liability on the basis that, by Lord litigating, the insured was in breach of Atkinson, an arbitration clause in the policy. The Lord arbitration clause applied only "if any Parmoor, difference arises as to the amount of any Lord Parker loss or damage" and provided that "it of shall be a condition precedent to any Waddington right of action or suit upon this policy that the award by such arbitrator, arbitrators or umpire of the amount of the loss or damage if disputed shall be first obtained". Held: the insurance company was not entitled to rely on the arbitration clause. The arbitration clause applied only to differences concerning the amount of loss and, therefore, not to a claim that was repudiated by the insurer altogether. (Haldane obiter) "there has been in the proceedings throughout a repudiation on the part of the respondents of their liability based upon charges of fraud and arson, the effect of which, if they are right, is that all benefit under the policy is forfeited. But one of the benefits is the right to go to arbitration under this contract, and to establish your claim in a way which may, to some people, seem preferable to proceeding in the Courts; and accordingly that is one of the things which the appellants have, according to the respondents, forfeited with every other benefit under the contract. Now my Lords, speaking for myself, when there is a repudiation which goes to the substance of the whole contract I do not see how the person setting up that

repudiation can be entitled to insist on a subordinate term of the contract still being enforced."

Thomas -v- Tyne and Wear SS Freight Insurance Association [1917] 1 KB 938 1917 Transport, Insurance Casemap For an insurer to set up a defence under 1 Citers claim for the loss of a ship on the grounds of the unseaworthiness of the vessel, the unseaworthiness must have been causative of the relevant loss.

Woodall -v- Pearl Assurance Co Ltd [1919] 1 KB 593 1919 Insurance Casemap CA 1 Cites Bankes LJ, 1 Citers Warrington LJ

Simmonds -v- Cockell [1920] 1 KB 843 1920 Insurance The insurance policy warranted that the Roche J premises would be always occupied. The 1 Citers premises were damaged while the insured and his wife were absent for a few hours. Held: The warranty did not require a permanent continuous presence, and the insurer did not avoid liability. If the insurers had wanted a "continuous presence of some one in the premises", they could have stipulated that "the premises were never to be left unattended".

Re Hooley Hill Rubber and Royal Insurance Co [1920] 1 KB 257 1920 Insurance, Contract Casemap CA When interprting a contract, it is assumed 1 Citers Bankes LJ, that the draftsman works with a view to Scrutton LJ certainty of sense and standardisation of terms. Bankes LJ said: "Courts should be

chary in interfering with the interpretation given to a well-known document and acted on for any considerable period of time." and "The decision in Stanley v Western LR 3 Ex 71, 74, 75 has been unchallenged and presumably acted on for fifty years, and even if I did not agree with the view there expressed I should hesitate before overruling it." Scrutton LJ said that he felt bound to read the words of the condition at issue in the light of existing English decisions.

Tinline -v- White Cross Insurance [1921] 3 KB 327 1921 Insurance the plaintiff had been convicted of 1 Citers Bailhache J manslaughter by reckless driving. The court was debarred by public policy from obtaining an indemnity under his insurance policy in respect of his civil liability. Held: He was not: "If the law is not logical, public policy is even less logical, for, by common consent, these third party indemnity insurances have been treated as valid and effective".

British and Foreign Insurance Co Ltd -v- Wilson Shipping Co Ltd [1921] 1 AC 188 1921 Insurance Casemap HL The vessel was insured against perils of 1 Citers the sea and suffered damage by a risk covered by the policy. Before the damage was repaired she was lost, still during the currency of the policy, but by a risk which is not covered by the policy. Held: The insurer was not liable for the unrepaired damage.

Sanderson & Son -v- Amour & Co Ltd 1922 SC (HL) 117 1922 Scotland, Insurance Casemap HL " I should say a single word as to the 1 Cites Lord 1 Citers case of Jureidini. That case has in my Dunedin, view no application, for the simple

Viscount Haldane and Lord Shaw of Dunfermline

reason that the clause of reference there was not a reference of all disputes, but only a reference as to the evaluation of loss. In other words, the clause was not a clause of the universal sort ..."

Dawson -v- Bonnin [1922] 2 AC 413 1922 Contract, Insurance Casemap HL 1 Citers The House considered whether a provision was a warranty rather than a representation, allowing the contract to be avoided for its breach.

La Compania Martiartu -v- Royal Exchange Assurance Corporation [1923] 1 KB 650 1923 Insurance Casemap CA The court found, on limited evidence, that 1 Citers Scrutton LJ the ship in respect of which her owners had claimed for a total loss of perils by sea, had in fact been scuttled with the connivance of those owners. Scrutton LJ said: 'This view renders it unnecessary finally to discuss the burden of proof, but in my present view, if there are circumstances suggesting that another cause than a peril insured against was the dominant or effective cause of the entry of seawater into the ship . . and an examination of all the evidence and probabilities leaves the court doubtful what is the real cause of the loss, the assured has failed to prove his case.'

Abraham Steamship -v- Westville [1923] A C 773; [1923] A C 773 1923 Insurance Casemap HL 1 Citers

Scottish Metropolitan Assurance Co Ltd -v- Groom (1924) 19 LI L Rep 131; 41 TLR 35; 20 Ll Rep 44 1924 Insurance Casemap

CA

cw Reinsurance - claim by owner on 1 Citers original policy - failure by reason of scuttling - judgments against owner for costs - impossibility of recovery - claim on reinsurance policy - sue and labour clause A ship was reinsured under a marine policy with the plaintiffs, who had reinsured but for total loss only. The claim by the owner against the plaintiffs failed because the ship had been scuttled, but the claimant sought the costs of defending the action. In the reinsurance policy there was a sue and labour clause. Held: The sue and labour claus ewas of no effect in this situation.

Forsikringsaktieselskabet National (of Copenhagen) -vAttorney-General (1924) 19 Ll LR 32 1924 Insurance CA 1 Citers Scrutton LJ

re Englebach [1924] 2 Ch 348 1924 Wills and Probate, Insurance Casemap A man took out a policy payable to his daughter (then one month old) on her attaining 21. He died. She attained 21 and the policy monies were paid to her but she was then persuaded to pay them into the hands of a stakeholder pending a decision as to the legal rights of the parties. Held: The estate of the father was entitled to the money.

Macaura -v- Northern Assurance Company Limited [1925] AC 619 1925 Insurance Casemap HL 1 Citers Neither a shareholder nor a simple creditor of a company had any insurable interest in any particular asset of the company because as such he had no legal or equitable interest in it. The owner of a

timber estate sold it to a company in exchange for shares in the company but the timber was insured against fire in his own name. The timber was destroyed by fire. Although the assured was the sole shareholder in and a substantial creditor of the company it was held that he had no insurable interest in the timber.

Forsikringsaktieselskabet National (of Copenhagen) -vAttorney-General [1925] AC 639 1925 Contract, Insurance Casemap HL Viscount Cave LC said that "by a contract 1 Cites Viscount of reinsurance the reinsuring party insures 1 Citers Cave LC the original insuring party against the original loss."

The Spathari [1925] UKHL 1; 1925 SLT 322; 1925 SC (HL) 6; (1925) 21 Ll L Rep 265 23 Mar Scotland, Torts - Other, Insurance 1925 HL Marine Insurance Act, 1906 17 Lord Link[s] omitted Chancellor Cave

Lek -v- Mathews [1927] 29 Ll LR 1927 Insurance Casemap Part of an insurance claim was fraudulent. 1 Citers Viscount The policy required that if one part fell, Sumner all the claim fell: "As to the construction of the false claim clause, I think that it refers to anything falsely claimed, that is, anything not so unsubstantial as to make the maxim de minimis applicable, and is not limited to a claim which as to the whole is false. It means the claim as to particular subject-matters in respect of which a right to indemnity is asserted, not the mere amount of money claimed without regard to the particulars or the contents of the claim; and a claim is false not only if it is deliberately invented but

also if it is made recklessly, not caring whether it is true or false but only seeking to succeed in the claim."

Hood's Trustees -v- Southern Union General Insurance Company of Australasia Ltd [1928] Ch 793 1928 Insurance Casemap 1 Citers H, being insured by the defendant Tomlin J company against liability to third parties, negligently injured C in a road accident. C subsequently brought an action against H for damages, but before he could obtain judgment, H was made bankrupt and the official receiver was appointed trustee in the bankruptcy. The trustee informed the defendant company in reply to a question that he did not intend to take any part in C's action against H. H later purported, for an agreed sum much below the value of the claim to release the defendant company from its obligation under the policy to indemnify him in respect of any judgment obtained against him by C. Shortly afterwards C obtained judgment against H for damages for the personal injuries sustained by him. Later H was made bankrupt a second time and another trustee in bankruptcy was appointed. Held: Where a person was injured or killed in a motor accident, for which a second (negligent and insolvent) motorist was liable and in respect of which that motorist was insured, that person was confined to his remedy in the negligent motorist's bankruptcy; Any insurance monies went to swell the sum available to the general body of creditors.

Re Harrington Motor Co Ltd, Ex parte Chaplin [1928] Ch 105 1928 Insurance, Insolvency Casemap A person injured in a road accident had 1 Citers Eve J obtained judgment for damages against the company, but had been unable to enforce the judgment before the company

went into liquidation. The company's motor insurers paid the amount of the judgment to the liquidator, who then treated the injured person as an unsecured creditor with no special interest in the insurance monies. Held: The liquidator had been right to deal with the matter in that way.

All information on this site is in general and summary form only. The content of any page on this site may be out of date and or incomplete, and you should not not rely directly upon it. Take direct professional legal advice which reflects your own particular situation. Home | lawindexpro | law-index | law-bytes | acts | Law Books | Discuss Law | Contact David Swarbrick lawindexpro | Two Doves Counselling | Jigsaw Jo | Faulty Flipper External Sites: wrigleyclaimon Media case law:
British Broadcasting Corporation -v- Harpercollins Publishers Ltd and Another | Gaunt -v- OFCOM and Liberty | Secretary of State for The Home Department -v- AP (No. 2) | Sugar -v- The British Broadcasting Commission and Another (No 2) | A -v- Independent News & Media Ltd and Others | In re Guardian News and Media Ltd and Others; HM Treasury -v- Ahmed and Others | Doctor A and Others -v- Ward and Another | O'Dowd (Boy George) v National Probation Service London | Financial Times Ltd and Others -vThe United Kingdom | A, Regina (on The Application of) -v- B; Regina (A) -v- Director of Establishments of the Security Service

From lawindexpro Advertisement:

Wrigley Claydon - Solicitors in Oldham and Todmorden

Wrigley Claydon are regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. 29-33 Union Street Oldham OL1 1HH 0161 624 6811 www.wrigleyclaydon.com email Wrigley Claydon
Copyright and Database Rights: David Swarbrick 2009