07.08.2013 Views

Misrepresentation, Non-Disclosure and Breach ... - Law Commission

Misrepresentation, Non-Disclosure and Breach ... - Law Commission

Misrepresentation, Non-Disclosure and Breach ... - Law Commission

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

A.11 The word "or" between negligence <strong>and</strong> non-disclosure suggests that these are<br />

separate grounds for rejection of a claim. If this is correct, the only obligation on<br />

the insurer in respect of misrepresentation or non-disclosure is not to<br />

"unreasonably" reject a claim.<br />

A.12 The weak nature of the protections offered by the Statements led one academic<br />

to describe them as “a rather pointless exercise”. 6<br />

A.13 Detailed criticisms of the Statements were also made in the English <strong>Law</strong><br />

<strong>Commission</strong>'s Report of 1980. 7<br />

ENGLISH LAW COMMISSION REPORT 1980<br />

A.14 In 1975, a draft European Directive called for the harmonisation of the essential<br />

provisions of insurance contract law. By 1978 there was a separate draft<br />

Directive modelled on French law <strong>and</strong> aimed at achieving a measure of<br />

harmonisation. In 1978, against this background, the Lord Chancellor referred<br />

insurance contract law to the <strong>Commission</strong>.<br />

The central problem<br />

A.15 The report concluded that the current duty of disclosure is far too stringent. It<br />

argued that a duty of disclosure based on what a "prudent insurer" thinks is<br />

material is inherently unreasonable:<br />

It requires every insured to disclose any fact which a prudent insurer<br />

would consider to be material, <strong>and</strong> entitles the insurer to repudiate the<br />

policy <strong>and</strong> to reject any claim in the event of any breach of this duty.<br />

However, an honest <strong>and</strong> reasonable insured may be quite unaware of<br />

the existence <strong>and</strong> extent of this duty, <strong>and</strong> even if he is aware of it, he<br />

may have great difficulty in forming any view as to what facts a<br />

prudent insurer would consider to be material.” 8<br />

A.16 As a result, a policyholder may act honestly <strong>and</strong> reasonably <strong>and</strong> still find that the<br />

insurer is entitled to avoid the policy. Furthermore, the duty of disclosure can<br />

operate as a trap in relation to proposal <strong>and</strong> renewal forms. A reasonable insured<br />

may think that it is sufficient to answer the questions presented, <strong>and</strong> find that they<br />

are later deprived of the cover they thought they had bought.<br />

6 See J Birds, “The Statement of Insurance Practice — A Measure of Regulation of the<br />

Insurance Contract” (1977) 40 Modern <strong>Law</strong> Review 677.<br />

7<br />

Insurance <strong>Law</strong> <strong>Non</strong>-<strong>Disclosure</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Breach</strong> of Warranty (1980) <strong>Law</strong> Com No 104, paras<br />

3.24 to 3.30.<br />

8 As above, at para 9.3(i).<br />

286

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!