Download Causation in insurance contract law 2nd edition meixian song ebook PDF with all chapters by Ebook Home

Causation in Insurance Contract Law

2nd Edition Meixian Song

Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://textbookfull.com/product/causation-in-insurance-contract-law-2nd-edition-meixi an-song-2/

More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant download maybe you interests ...

Causation in Insurance Contract Law 2nd Edition Meixian

Song https://textbookfull.com/product/causation-in-insurance-contractlaw-2nd-edition-meixian-song-2/

Contract Formation: Law and Practice 2nd Edition

Michael P. Furmston

https://textbookfull.com/product/contract-formation-law-andpractice-2nd-edition-michael-p-furmston/

Contract Law Uk Edition Emily Finch

https://textbookfull.com/product/contract-law-uk-edition-emilyfinch/

Contract, status, and fiduciary law First Edition Gold

https://textbookfull.com/product/contract-status-and-fiduciarylaw-first-edition-gold/

Casebook on Contract Law 13th Edition Jill Poole

https://textbookfull.com/product/casebook-on-contract-law-13thedition-jill-poole/

The Jewish Family Between Family Law and Contract Law Yehezkel Margalit

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-jewish-family-betweenfamily-law-and-contract-law-yehezkel-margalit/

Foundational Principles of Contract Law Melvin Aron Eisenberg

https://textbookfull.com/product/foundational-principles-ofcontract-law-melvin-aron-eisenberg/

Jus cogens international law and social contract First Paperback Edition Weatherall

https://textbookfull.com/product/jus-cogens-international-lawand-social-contract-first-paperback-edition-weatherall/

A restatement of the English law of contract First Edition Andrew Burrows

https://textbookfull.com/product/a-restatement-of-the-englishlaw-of-contract-first-edition-andrew-burrows/

CAUSATION IN INSURANCE CONTRACT LAW

Causation is a crucial and complex matter in ascertaining whether a particular loss or damage is covered in an insurance policy or in a tort claim, and is an issue that cannot be escaped.

Now in its second edition, this unique book assists practitioners in answering one of the most important questions faced in the handling of insurance and tort claims. Through extensive case law analysis, this book scrutinises the causation theory in marine insurance and non-marine insurance law, and provides a comparative study of the causation test in tort law. In addition, the author expertly applies causation questions in concrete scenarios, and ultimately, this book provides a single-volume solution to a very complex but essential question of insurance law and tort law. Thoroughly revised and updated throughout to include the Insurance Act 2015, several landmark cases and potential impacts of the COVID19 pandemic, the second edition also features an introduction re-written to clarify elementary and central questions of causation in insurance law and tort. Additionally, it also provides three brand new chapters on factual causation and legal causation, causation and interpretation, and causation and measure of losses to provide a deeper and more thorough analysis, comparing academic approaches and juridical approaches to addressing causation issues in insurance claims.

This book is an invaluable and unique guide for insurance industry professionals, as well as legal practitioners, academics and students in the fields of insurance and tort law.

Meixian Song is Associate Professor at Dalian Maritime University and editor of Lloyd’s Shipping and Trade Law. Meixian was lecturer at the University of Exeter, then joined the University of Southampton. Meixian’s research interest lies in maritime law and commercial law. Her recent research articles were published in Legal Studies, Lloyd’s Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly and the Journal of Business Law.

CONTEMPORARY COMMERCIAL LAW

Maritime Law in China

Emerging Issues and Future Developments

Edited by Johanna Hjalmarsson and Jenny Jingbo Zhang

Illegality in Marine Insurance Law

Feng Wang

Insurance Law Implications of Delay in Maritime Transport

Ayşegül Buğra

Online Arbitration

Faye Fangfei Wang

Double Insurance and Contribution

Nisha Mohamed

The Law and Autonomous Vehicles

Matthew Channon, Lucy McCormick and Kyriaki Noussia

FIDIC Yellow Book

A Commentary

Ben Beaumont

The Contract of Carriage

Multimodal Transport and Unimodal Regulation

Paula Bäckdén

FIDIC Red Book

A Commentary

Ben Beaumont

Blockchain Technology and the Law Opportunities and Risks

Muharem Kianieff

Third Party Protection in Shipping

Carlo Corcione

Multi-sided Music Platforms and the Law

Chijioke Ifeoma Okorie

Comparative Analysis of Interim Measures

Interim Remedies (England & Wales) v Preservation Measures (China)

Vivek Jain, Thomas Macey-Dare QC and Shengnan Jia

Knock-for-Knock Indemnities and the Law

Contractual Limitation and Delictual Liability

Edited by Kristoffer Svendsen, Endre Stavang and Greg Gordon

Managing International Trade Risk

Customs, Revenue and VAT Compliance

Mark Rowbotham

Company Directors' Liability and the Protection of Creditors

Andrew Kaey

For more information about this series, please visit: www.routledge.com /Contemporary-Commercial-Law/book-series/CCL

CAUSATION IN INSURANCE CONTRACT LAW

SECOND EDITION

MEIXIAN SONG

Designed cover image: Getty

First published 2024 by Informa Law from Routledge 4 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN

and by Informa Law from Routledge 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158

Informa Law from Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

The right of Meixian Song to be identified as author of this work has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Song, Meixian, author.

Title: Causation in insurance contract law / Meixian Song.

Description: Second edition. | Abingdon, Oxon [UK] ; New York, NY: Routledge, 2024. | Series: Contemporary commercial law | This was originally based on author’s dissertation (doctoral) -University of Southhampton, School of Law, 2013, issued under title: Rules of causation under marine insurance law from the perspective of marine risks and losses. | Includes bibliographical references and index.

Identifiers: LCCN 2023041236 (print) | LCCN 2023041237 (ebook) | ISBN 9781032153759 (hardback) | ISBN 9781032153766 (paperback) | ISBN 9781003243847 (ebook)

Subjects: LCSH: Marine insurance law--Law and legislation--England. | Proximate cause (Law)--England.

Classification: LCC KD1845 .S66 2024 (print) | LCC KD1845 (ebook) | DDC 346.42/086--dc23

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023041236

LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023041237

ISBN: 9781032153759 (hbk)

ISBN: 9781032153766 (pbk)

ISBN: 9781003243847 (ebk)

DOI: 10.4324/9781003243847

Typeset in Times New Roman by Deanta Global Publishing Services, Chennai, India

This book is dedicated to my grandparents.

6.3

6.4

6.3.1

6.3.2

6.3.3

6.3.4

6.4.1

6.4.2

6.4.3

6.5

C HAPTER 7 CAUSATION AND MACHINERY FOR QUALIFYING LOSSES

7.1

7.3

C HAPTER 8

8.1

8.2

8.5

C HAPTER 9 CAUSAL NOTIONS UNDER INSURANCE ACT

9.1

9.2

9.3

FOREWORD

The first edition of Dr Meixian Song’s Causation in Insurance Contract Law was rightly greeted with critical acclaim. Although there have been numerous books on causation in the common law, as well as detailed philosophical analyses of causation, Meixian’s book was the first comprehensive treatise on causation as it operates in the law of insurance.

The requirement that the assured must demonstrate that the loss was proximately caused by an insured peril is inherent in any insurance claim and is at root in most cases a simple question of fact. That said, there have always been underpinning policy issues. The courts in early marine cases had to decide whether insurers should be held responsible where the crew of a wooden ship chose to try to keep warm by starting a small fire, or where the crew responded to a collision, grounding or threatened taking at sea was itself the reason for the loss. All of this led to a less than satisfactory codification in the Marine Insurance Act 1906, the draftsman of which somehow managed to convert a causation question into a duty to mitigate loss and thereby to create confusion for over a century. Subsequently, the courts had to deal with the problem of death or personal injury resulting from a variety of unfortunate conjunctions of natural causes and unexpected occurrences, and produced a series of conflicting decisions some of which displayed clear sympathy with the bereaved.

In recent years the context has changed. Man-made and natural catastrophes have required further policy determinations. How was the law to deal with the horrible and negligently-inflicted disease of mesothelioma when pinning liability on a single culprit was in many cases beyond the capabilities of science? The decision in Fairchild to impose liability in tort without proof of causation led to two decades of insurance – and, inevitably, then reinsurance – litigation to determine how the liabilities should be treated under employers’ liability policies not designed to deal with long-tail illnesses and operative in different years for different potential defendants.

Perhaps the greatest challenge was posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, and a mass of ongoing case law to try to fit the business interruption losses from

a worldwide disaster into policies designed exclusively to respond to local events. The answer was, controversially, to be found in causation, leading to the conclusion that a single case of infection on or near the insured premises was in causation terms as weighty as the millions of infections elsewhere. Questions of concurrent causes were thus brought into sharp focus, raising in particular the “but for” problem that even if there had not been an insured peril there would still have been a loss: that caused two members of the Supreme Court in the Arch decision to admit the error of their ways a decade earlier when as arbitrator and judge they decided in the context of the New Orleans hurricanes that there should be no cover in such circumstances. As in Fairchild, the equally important “law of unintended consequences” was triggered: if there is pandemic cover, what is the response of causation to losses occurring after the expiry of the contractual indemnity period that can be traced back to losses within it? We are awaiting an appellate answer to that question.

The point, then, is that causation cannot be analysed simply by a case-bycase analysis of individual rulings. Some of course are discrete: for example, Meixian discusses the question of whether a bomb dropped on Exeter in 1942 can be the proximate cause of damage to the university and other buildings after its discovery and controlled detonation 80 years later. But for others, there are complex underlying policy issues with wide-ranging consequences. The complexities of causation led the draftsman of Section 11 of the Insurance Act 2015 to bow to pressure from the insurance industry and to seek to devise a means other than via the mechanism of causation to allow an assured to recover under the policy despite being in breach of a clear policy obligation. Nobody disputes that an assured who has failed to install adequate locks should be precluded from recovery if the building is hit by a falling plane. But should that also apply where inadequate locks are not picked but instead subjected to the overzealous treatment afforded to the “bloody doors” by Michael Caine’s crew in The Italian Job?

All of this and more is analysed, thoroughly, deeply and clearly in Meixian’s second edition. The book is a thought-provoking treatment of all aspects of causation in insurance law. There is no shying away from recognising policy issues and tackling them head-on. The book is a delight to read, full of insights. Forewords often say that a book should be found on the shelves of libraries, practitioners and academics. That can be said about Meixian’s book without a shred of hyperbole. Causation in Insurance Contract Law cannot be recommended highly enough.

Rob Merkin 15 August 2023

PREFACE

The primary purpose of a causation enquiry in insurance cases is to determine whether and if so to what extent insurers are liable under contracts of insurance. The works of Hart and Honoré and many other scholars including Stapleton have contributed to unpacking legal elements of causal notions in general, and in tort in particular. Although insurance notoriously investigates the “proximate” cause of loss in order to determine whether insurers are to be liable for certain losses, the decisions made by English courts are far from reconcilable. Sir Chalmers, the codifier of the Marine Insurance Act 1906, had suggested that the problem lies in the inference of matters of fact, and that consequently causal connection is perceived as a complex and uncertain issue.

In the earlier edition, we considered how The Cendor MOPU [2011] UKSC 5 placed the spotlight on the causation question in insurance law. It illustrates the significance of dealing with incoherency and uncertainty in the law. In the past decade, several further landmark cases have been decided by the Supreme Court, including The Brillante Virtuoso, The B Atlantic and The FCA test case. As will be seen in the discussion of these decisions in the following, causation remains a complex issue.

Considering the significant developments in case law during the decade since the first edition of this work was published, the second edition provides a more careful account of academic and judicial approaches to causation issues in insurance claims. This book highlights that English courts have identified contractual limitations and causal requirements as decisive components of an insurer’s liability. This book examines the extent to which the judicial approaches should draw a clearer line between contract interpretation and causation issues in insurance contract law. This argument is informed by academic discussion, in which Hart and Honoré suggested that causal issues should be kept separate from issues of legal policy such as legal policies concerning the optimal allocation of social risks, the scope of rules of law and the impact of fairness between the parties in the particular case. Scholars including Stapleton and Wright go further, claiming that there is a significant and sharp separation between causal enquiry and non-causal normative assessment. The value judgement embedded in

legal causation would require a book of its own. This book aims to unpack the relationships between interpretation and the causation to the determination of insurance indemnity. In this second edition, there are major updates in the chapter entitled Concurrent Causes, and three new chapters entitled “Causation and interpretation,” “Causation and machinery for qualifying losses” and “Causal notions under Insurance Act 2015: beyond the proximate cause of loss.”

Another aim of the second edition is to provide a more detailed account of the comparison of causation theories in tort law and insurance law. Such a comparison has been the subject of judicial scrutiny in the UK Supreme Court decision of the FCA test case. Causation and the allocation of liability have traditionally been viewed as different in insurance law compared to criminal or the law of tort. Through the comparison, this book highlights that it is not necessary to isolate causation in insurance contracts from the central debate surrounding the common question regarding the roles of causation in ascertaining and truncating legal liability.

I must express my thanks here to Professor Robert Merkin KC and Dr Johanna Hjalmarsson for the invaluable support on this edition and guidance on the first edition.

Song July 2023

Meixian

TABLE OF CASES

(bold = main textual ref; roman = footnoted)

A/B Karlshamns Oljefabriker v Monarch Steamship Co. Ltd (1948–1949) 82 LlL Rep. 137 ............................................................. 134

Ace European Group v Chartis Insurance UK Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 224; [2012] EWHC 1245 187

Adelaide Steamship Co Ltd v Crown (1923) 14 LlL Rep. 341 69

AIG Europe Ltd v Woodman [2017] UKSC 18 200

Aioi Nissay Dowa Insurance Co. Ltd (formerly Chiyoda Fire and Marine Insurance Co. Ltd) v Heraldglen Ltd [2013] EWHC 154 (Comm); [2013] Lloyd’s Rep IR 281 ............................................ 173

Ajum Goolam Hossen & Co. v Union Marine Insurance Company [1901] AC 362 ..................................................................... 227

Alexander John Dudgeon v E. Pembroke 1874 LR 9 QB 581; (1876–1877) LR 2 App Cas 284; (1877) 2 AC 284 .. 16, 46, 109, 110, 160

Aliza Glacial [2002] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 421 ......................................................191

Allianz Insurance plc v The University of Exeter [2023] EWHC 630 (TCC) 36

Allied Maples Group Ltd v Simmons & Simmons [1995] 1 WLR 1602 CA 95

Alphacell Ltd v Woodward [1972] AC 824 .................................................. 17

Alstom Ltd v Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. [2013] FCA 116 ................ 4, 186

American Centennial Insurance Co v INSCO Ltd [1996] LRLR 407 ...... 199

AMI Insurance Ltd v Ross John Legg and others [2017] NZCA 321 ..................................................................... 56, 104, 138, 139

Andersen v Marten [1907] 2 K.B. 248; [1908] 1 KB 601 [1908] AC 334 ...... 54

Anderson v Minneapolis (1920) 146 Minn. 430, 179 NW 45 .................... 120

Anderson v Morice (1874–1875) LR 10 CP 58 226

Antaios Cia Naviera SA v Salen Rederierna AB [1985] AC 191 32

Anthony Gibson v Robert Small and Others (1853) 4 HL Cas 353 160

Arnold v Britton [2015] AC 1619 31

Assicurazioni Generali SpA v ARIG [2003] Lloyd’s Rep IR 131 .............. 236

xiv

Associated Metals & Minerals Corp. v M/V OLYMPIC MENTOR

1997 AMC 1140 .................................................................................. 182

Atlantik Confidence [2016] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 525 .......................................... 211

Axa Reinsurance (UK) plc v. Field [1996] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 233 ................. 197

Axa Versicherung AG v Arab Insurance Group [2017] EWCA Civ 96 .... 236

AXL Resources Ltd v Antares Underwriting Services Ltd [2010] EWHC 3244 (Comm) 216, 217, 227, 228

AXN & Ors v Worboys & Ors [2012] EWHC 1730 63

Bailey v Ministry of Defence [2008] EWCA Civ 883 86

Baines v Dixon Coles & Gill [2021] EWCA Civ 1211 ............................... 200

Baker v Willoughby [1970] AC 467 ............................................................. 81

Bank of Nova Scotia v Hellenic War Risks Association (Bermuda) Ltd (The Good Luck) [1992] 1 AC 233 (HL)..................... 232

Bank of Queensland Ltd v AIG Australia Ltd [2018] NSWSC 1689 ......... 201

Banque Bruxelles Lambert S.A. v Eagle Star Insurance Co. Ltd [1995] QB 375 ....................................................................................... 69

Barker v Corus UK Ltd [2006] UKHL 20 90, 219

Barnett v Chelsea & Kensington Hospital [1969] 1 QB 428 85

Beazley Underwriting Ltd v The Travelers Companies Incorporated [2011] EWHC 1520 (Comm) 65, 199

Becker, Gray v London Insurance Corporation [1918] AC 101 .......3, 49, 188

Bell v Lothiansure Ltd 1993 SLT 421 .........................................................170

Betty v Liverpool and London Globe Ins Co Ltd (1962) 310 F 2d 308 (US CA 4th Circ) ......................................................................... 228

Bird’s Cigarette Manufacturing Co. Ltd v Rouse [1924] 19 LlL Rep. 301 ....................................................................................... 129

Blackenhagen v The London Assurance Company 170 ER 1019 .............. 188

Blower v The Great Western Railway Company (1871–1872) LR 7 CP 655 182

Board of Trade v Hain Steamship Co. Ltd [1929] AC 531 108, 117

Bond Air Services v Hill [1955] 2 QB 417 213

Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw [1956] AC 613 ............................. 84, 85

Borealis AB v Geogas Trading SA [2011] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 482 ...................... 69

Boyd v Dubois [1811] 3 Campbell 133, 170 ER 1331 ................................. 181

Brian Leighton (Garages) Ltd v Allianz Insurance Plc [2023] EWCA Civ 8 ........................................................................ 32, 35, 41, 58

Bridgeman v Allied Mutual Insurance Limited (1999) 10 ANZ Insurance Cases 61-448 ........................................................................ 60

Britestone Pte Ltd v Smith & Associates Far East, Ltd 205

British & Foreign Marine Insurance Co v Samuel Sanday & Co [1916] 1 AC 650 49

British & Foreign Marine Insurance Co. Ltd v Gaunt [1921] 2 AC 41 ................................................................................... 145, 215, 215

British and Foreign Marine Insurance Company Ltd v Gaunt [1923] 16 LlL Rep. 129 ....................................................................... 183

British Waterways v Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Plc [2012] EWHC 460 (Comm) ............................................................................. 62

Brotherton v Aseguradora Colseguros SA (No. 2) [2003] 2 CLC 629 210

Brownsville Holdings Ltd v Adamjee Insurance Co Ltd (The Milasan) [2000] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 458 208, 210

Brushfield Ltd (t/a The Clarence Hotel) v Arachas Corporate Brokers Ltd [2021] IEHC 263; [2022] Lloyd’s Rep IR Plus 18 ................................................................................. 35, 70, 171

Butler v Wildman (1820) 3 B&Ald 398; 106 ER 708 .......................... 149, 188

Canada Rice Mills Ltd v Union Marine & General Insurance Co. Ltd [1941] AC 55 ............................................................ 151, 182, 189

Canada Rice Mills Ltd v Union Marine and General Insurance Co. Ltd (1940) 67 LlL Rep. 549 216

Canadian Indemnity Company v Walkem Machinery & Equipment Ltd 1975 CanLII 141 (SCC), [1976] 1 SCR 309 169

Caribbean Sea [1980] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 338 155

Carroll v QBE Insurance (Europe) Ltd and others [2020] EWHC 153 ...... 64

Casalino v Insurance Australian Ltd [2007] ACTSC 25 ............................ 63

Caudle & Ors v Sharp [1995] CLC 642 .................................................... 173

v Hicks [1911] 2 KB .......................................................................

Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd [2009] 1 AC 11 .......................... 31 Chester v Afshar [2005] 1 AC 134 ............................................................... 83

Chubb Insurance Singapore Ltd v Sizer Metals Pte Ltd [2023] SGHC(A) 17 224

Clothing Management Technology Ltd v Beazley Solutions Ltd (t/a Beazley Marine UK) [2012] EWHC 727 148, 190

Compania Maritima San Basilio SA v Oceanus Mutual Underwriting Association (Bermuda) Ltd (The Eurysthenes) [1977] QB 49 ........................................................................................161

Compania Naviera Martiartu v Royal Exchange Assurance Corporation (1924) 19 LlLRep 95....................................................... 207

Compania Naviera Santi S.A. v Indemnity Marine Assurance Co. Ltd [1960] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 469............................................................... 213

Compania Naviera Vascongada v British & Foreign Maritime Insurance Co. Ltd (1936) 54 LlL Rep 35 211

Continental Illinois National Bank & Trust Co of Chicago and Xenofon Maritime SA v Alliance Assurance Co Ltd (The Captain Panagos DP) [1989] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 33 ................................... 211

Cook v Lewis [1952] 1 DLR 1 .............................................................. 84, 120

Coxe v Employers Liability Assurance Corp Ltd [1916] 2 KB 629 ............................................................................................. 56, 60, 65, 66

CT Bowring & Co. Ltd v Amsterdam London Insurance Co Ltd (1930) 36 LlL Rep. 309 129

Cullen v Butler (1816) 5 M&S 461 149, 151

Cultural Foundation & Anor v Beazley Furlonge Ltd & Ors [2019] Lloyd’s Rep IR 12 .................................................................... 124

CV Stealth (No. 2) [2017] EWHC 2808 (Comm) ......................................... 69

Davidson v Burnand (1868–1869) LR 4 CP 117 ........................................ 225

Delphine [2001] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 542 ........................................................... 228

De Souza v Home & Overseas Insurance Co. Ltd [1995] LRLR 45 ......... 166

Derksen v 539938 Ontario Ltd [2001] SCC 72 .................................. 104, 138

Dhak v Insurance Co. of North America (UK) Ltd [1996] 1 WLR 936 166

Dixon v Sadler (1839) 5 M&W 160

Dunthorne v Bentley [1999] Lloyd’s Rep IR 560 63, 64

Durham v BAI (Run Off) Ltd. [2012] UKSC 14; [2012] 1 WLR 867 ........................................................................97, 98, 99, 100

E. D. Sassoon & Co. v Western Assurance Co. [1912] AC 561 ......... 134, 153

E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd v Yorkshire Insurance Company [1923] 16 LlL Rep. 129 .................................................................................. 183

Elfie A. Issaias v Marine Insurance Co., LTD. (1922) 13 LlL Rep 381 ......218

Environment Agency v Empress Car Co. (Abertillery) Ltd [1998] UKHL 5, [1999] 2 AC 22 39, 79

Equitas Insurance Ltd v Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 718 100, 172

EUI Ltd v Bristol Alliance Ltd Partnership [2012] EWCA Civ 1267 174

European Group v Chartis [2012] EWHC 1245 (QB); (Comm) ....... 133, 223

Eurus [1998] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 351 .................................................................. 70

F. W. Berk & Co. Ltd v Style [1955] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 382 ............................. 187

Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd (2002) UKHL 22; [2003] 1 AC 32 ................................................................. 18, 83, 124, 218

Fawcus v Sarefield (1856) 6 E&B 192 ....................................................... 160

FCA v Arch [2021] UKSC 1 24, 28, 30, 32, 203

Fenton v Thorley & Co Ltd (1903) AC 443 169

Fidelity and Casualty Company of New York v Mitchell [1917] AC 592 67

Financial Conduct Authority (Appellant) v Arch Insurance (UK) Ltd and others (Respondents) [2021] UKSC 1 ....................................................... 3, 56, 103, 114, 170, 194, 195

Financial Conduct Authority v Arch Insurance (UK) Limited and Others [2020] EWHC 2448 (Comm) ............................................. 34, 113

Fooks v Smith [1924] 2 KB 508 ............................................................. 52, 53

Galloway v Guardian Royal Exchange (UK) Ltd [1999] Lloyd’s Rep IR 209 238

Galoo Ltd (in liquidation) and Others v Bright Grahame Murray (a firm) and Another [1994] 1 WLR 1360 ............................................ 19

Garvey et al. v State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, 48 Cal 3d 395 . 139

George Cohen Sons & Co. v Standard Marine Insurance Co. Ltd (1925) 21 LlL Rep 30 .......................................................................... 164

Gibbs v Mercantile Mutual Insurance [2003] HCA 39 ............................. 148

Global Process Systems Inc v Syarikat Takaful Malaysia Bhd (The Cendor Mopu) [2011] UKSC 5; [2011] 1 All ER 869; [2011] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 560 3–4, 18, 36, 48, 61, 104, 109–110, 113, 121, 129, 131–134, 135, 139, 144, 151–154, 162, 164, 174, 180–181, 185–186, 188, 215, 216

Glowrange Ltd v CGU Insurance Plc ....................................................... 221

Gordon v Rimmington (1807) 1 Camp 123 .................................................. 49

Government Office of New South Wales v RJ Green & Lloyd Pty Ltd [1966] HCA 6 ................................................................................. 63

Grant v Sun Shipping Co [1948] AC 549 .................................................. 120

Grant, Smith and Company and McDonnell v Seattle

Construction and Dry Dock Company [1920] AC 162 .............. 148, 152

Gray v Barr [1971] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 1; [1971] 2 QB 554 16, 37, 69, 70, 166, 168

Green v Brown (1743) 2 Str 1199 214, 217, 225

Gregg v Scott [2005] 2 WLR 268 HL 93

Greggs plc v Zurich Insurance plc [2022] EWHC 2545 (Comm) 201, 202

Guaranty National Insurance Co v North River Insurance Co 909 F.2d 133 (5th Cir. 1990) ............................................................... 128

Hadkinson v Robinson (1803) 3 B&P 388 ................................................. 188

Hagedorn v Whitemore 1816, 1 stark, 157 ..........................................103, 105

Hamilton, Fraser & Co. v Pandorf & Co. 12 App Cas 518 ...................... 158

Hamlyn v The Crown Accidental Insurance Company [1893] 1 QB 750 166

Harrisons v Shipping Controller (The Inkonka) [1921] 1 K.B. 122 16

Helicopter Resources Pty Ltd & Vowell Air Services (Helicopters) Pty Ltd v Sun Alliance Australia Unreported, Supreme Court of Victoria, Ormiston J, 26 March 1991 ................... 187

HIH Casualty & General Ins Ltd v New Hampshire Ins Co [2001] EWCA Civ 735 ........................................................................ 232

Hodge v Anglo-American Oil Co. (1922) 12 L1LRep. 183 .......................... 68

Hogan v Bentinck West Hartley Collieries [1949] 1 All ER 588 80

Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co Ltd [1970] AC 1004 80

Hornal v Neuberger Products Ltd [1957] 1 Q.B. 247 207, 208

Hotson v East Berkshire Health Authority [1987] AC 750 HL; [1987] 2 All ER 909 .............................................................................. 92

Houghton (RA) and Mancon Ltd v Sunderland Marine Mutual Insurance Co. Ltd (The Ny-Eeasteyr) [1988] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 60 ..........210

Humber Oil Terminal Trustee Ltd v Owners of the Sivand [1998] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 97 ................................................................................... 18

Hutchinson v Epson & St Helier NHS Trust [2002] EWHC 2363 .............. 85

Hyper Trust Ltd v FBD Insurance plc [2020] EWHC 2448 (Comm); [2020] Lloyd’s Rep IR 527 171

IAG New Zealand Ltd v Jackson [2014] Lloyd’s Rep IR 97 57

Ide v ATB Sales Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 424 222

Impress (Worcester) Ltd v Rees [1971] 2 All ER 357 .................................. 80

International Energy Group Ltd v Zurich Insurance Plc UK [2013] EWCA Civ 39 ............................................................................ 90

Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society [1998] 1 WLR 896 ................................................................... 31

Ionides v The Universal Marine Insurance Company (1863) 14 CB (NS) 259 ....................................................................... 43, 44, 45, 60

Issaias v Marine Insurance Co. Ltd. (1923) 15 LlLEep 186 207, 210

J.J. Lloyd instruments Ltd. v Northern Star Insurance Co. Ltd (The Miss Jay Jay) [1987] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 32 67, 103, 104, 109–112, 114, 118, 121–122, 124, 126, 127, 131–134, 139, 151, 152, 164, 165

Jacob v Gaviller (1902) 7 Com Cas 116 .................................................... 145

James Yachts v Thames & Mersey Marine Insurance Co. [1977] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 206 ............................................................................... 148

Jobling v Associated Dairies [1982] AC 794 ............................................... 82

John Cory & Sons v Albert Edward Burr (1882–1883) LR 8 App Cas 393 ......................................................................................46, 47, 49

JSM Management Pty Ltd v QBE Insurance (Australia) Ltd [2011] VSC 339 133, 183

Kacianoff v China Traders Insurance Co. Ltd [1914] 3 KB 1121 ............. 188

Kajima UK Engineering Ltd v Underwater Insurance Co. Ltd [2008] Lloyd’s Rep IR 391 .................................................................... 65

Kamilla Hans-Peter Eckhoff KG v AC Oerssleff’s EFTF A/B (The Kamilla) [2006] EWHC 509 (Comm); [2006] 2

Lloyd’s Rep 238 .................................................................................... 60

Kastor Navigation Co Ltd and Another v AGF M A T and others (“Kastor Too”) [2002] EWHC 2601 (Comm), [2003] 1

Lloyd’s Rep 296 205

Kastor Navigation Co. Ltd v Axa Global Risks (UK) Ltd (The Kastor Too) [2004] 2 CLC 68 ......................................................... 51, 119

Kelly v Norwich Union Fire Insurance Ltd [1990] 1 WLR 139 ................ 126

Kish v Taylor [[1912] A.C. 604] ................................................................. 163

Kitchen v Royal Air Force Association [1958] 1 WLR 563 ........................ 95

Knight v Faith (1850) 15 QB 649 ............................................................... 126

Koebel v Saunders (1864) 17 CB(NS) 71 .................................................. 181

Kopitoff v Wilson (1875–1876) LR 1 QBD 377 ........................................... 110

Koufos v C Czarnikow Ltd (The Heron II) [1967] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 457; [1969] 1 AC 350 102, 198

Kusel v Atkin [1997] CLC 554 51

Kuwait Airways Corp v Kuwait Insurance Co. SAK [1996] 1

Lloyd’s Rep 664; [1999] CLC 934 ...................................................................................................... 116, 126, 173

Kuwait Airways Corporation v Iraqi Airways Co (Nos 4 and 5) [2002] UKHL 19 ..................................................................................... 7

L’Union Assurances de Paris IARD v Sun Alliance Insurance Ltd [1995] NSWCA 539 102

La Compania Martiatu v Royal Exchange Assurance Corporation [1923] 1 KB 650 213

Lamb Head Shipping Co. Ltd v Jennings (The Marel) [1994] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 624 .................................................................................. 221

Latham v Johnson [1913] 1 KB ................................................................... 68

Lawrence v Aberdein 106 ER 1133; (1821) 5 B & Ald 107 .................. 61, 146

Lawrence v Accident Insurance Co. (1880–1881) LR 7 QBD 216 ............ 165

LCA Marrickville Pty Ltd v Swiss Re International SE [2022] FCAFC 17; [2022] ILRP 14 ........................................................... 33, 203

Leeds Beckett University v Travelers Insurance Co Ltd [2017] EWHC 558 (TCC) 145–146

Lek v Mathews (1927) 29 LlLEep 141 207, 212

Levy v Assicurazioni Generali [1940] AC 791 213

Leyland Shipping Co Ltd v Norwich Union Fire Insurance Society Ltd [1918] AC 350 ................................... 9, 13, 14, 17, 41, 49–50, 69, 75, 103, 107, 109, 111, 115

Liverpool & London War Risks v Ocean S.S. Co [1948] AC 243 ......... 5, 103

Lloyds TSB General Insurance Holdings & Ors v Lloyds Bank Group Insurance Co Ltd. [2003] UKHL 48 ........................................ 60

Lloyds TSB General Insurance Holdings and Others v Lloyds Bank Group Insurance Company Limited [2001] Lloyd’s Rep PN 28 97, 200

Lloyds TSB General Insurance Holdings v Lloyds Bank Group Insurance Co Ltd [2002] Lloyd’s Rep IR 113 ..................................41, 60

London & Provincial Leather Processes Ltd v Hudson [1939] 2 KB 724 ..............................................................................................145

Lucena v Craufurd (1802) 3 Bos&Pul 75, Exch .......................................... 45

Magnus v Buttemer (1852) 138 ER 720 ..................................................... 152

Malcolm v Dickson 1951 SC 542 ................................................................. 44

Mallett v McMonagle [1970] AC 166 95

Manifest Shipping Co. Ltd v Uni-Polaris Insurance Co. Ltd (The Star Sea) [2001] UKHL 1 161, 177

Mann v Lexington Insurance Co. [2001] 1 All ER (Comm) 28 173

Marcel Beller v Hayden [1978] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 472 .............................166, 167

Marina Offshore Pte Ltd v China Insurance Co. (Singapore) Pte Ltd [2006] SGCA 28. [2007] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 66, [2007] Lloyd’s Rep IR 383, CA (Sing) ............................................ 109, 151, 164

Marshall Wells of Can. Ltd. v Winnipeg Supply & Fuel Co. (1964), 49 WWR 664 .......................................................................... 169

Martini Investments v McGuin [2001] Lloyd’s Rep IR 374 ....................... 109

Masefield AG v Amlin Corporate Member Ltd [2011] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 630 179

Mayban General Assurance BHD v Alstom Power Plants Ltd [2004] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 609 18, 135, 153, 185

McCarthy v St Paul Insurance Co Ltd [2007] FCAFC 28; 157 FCR 402; 239 ALR 527 ...................................................................... 137

McGhee v National Coal Board [1973] 1 WLR 1 HL .......................... 87, 218

McGregor v Prudential Insurance Co [1998] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 112 ............. 209

McWilliams v Sir William Arrol and Co Ltd [1962] 1 WLR 295 .............................................................................. 79, 82, 115

Melinda Holdings SA v Hellenic Mutual War Risks Association (Bermuda) Ltd [2011] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 141 191

Mercantile Steamship Co. v Tyser (1880–1881) L.R. 7 QBD 73 47

Merchants’ Marine Insurance Company v Liverpool Marina & General Insurance Company (1928) 31 LlL Rep. 45 ..................... 53, 66

Midland Mainline Ltd v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd [2003] EWHC 1771 (Comm); [2004] Lloyd’s Rep IR 22 ................................. 60

Midland Mainline Ltd v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 1042, [2004] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 604 ...................................... 112

Midland Mainline Ltd v Eagle Star Insurance Co. Ltd [2004] 2 CLC 480 108

Milton Keynes v Nulty [2011] EWHC 2847 222

Ministeroi Pensions v Chennell [1946] 2 All E.R. 719 17

Morley v United Friendly Insurance Plc [1993] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 490 .......... 34

Mountain v Whittle [1921] 1 AC 615 ................................................. 135, 153

Munro Brice & Co. v War Risks Association [1918] 2 KB 78 ................... 214

N. E. Neter & Co. Ltd v Licenses & General Insurance Co. Ltd (1943) 77 LlL Rep 202 ................................................................ 151–152

N. Michalos & Sons Maritime SA v Prudential Assurance Co. (The Zinovia) [1984] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 264 209, 210

Nacional v Hispanica Aseguradora SA [1978] AC 853 60

National Justice Compania Naviera SA v Prudential Assurance Co Ltd (The Ikarian Reefer) (No. 1) [1995] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 455 209

National Oilwell (UK) Ltd v Davy Offshore Ltd [1993] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 582 ............................................................................................... 189

Naviera de Canarias SA v Nacional Hispanica Aseguradora SA (The Playa de las Nieves) [1978] AC 853, [1977] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 457 ................................................................................................179

Navigators Insurance Co Ltd v Atlasnavios-Navegacao Lda (formerly Bnavios-Navegacao Lda) (The B Atlantic) [2018] UKSC 26; [2019] AC 136 104, 117, 118

Netherlands v Youell & Others [1998] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 236, [1998] CLC 44 159, 175, 176, 177, 189, 190, 191

Nicholson v Atlas Steel Foundry and Engineering Co Ltd 87

Noten v Hardings [1990] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 283 ................................................ 16

Novartis Grimsby Ltd v Cookson [2007] EWCA Civ 1261 ......................... 86

Orient-Express Hotels Ltd v Assicurazioni General SpA (UK) (t/a Generali Global Risk) [2010] EWHC 1186 (Comm); [2010] Lloyd’s Rep IR 531 (“Orient Express”) .............. 71, 119, 120, 196

Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Docks & Engineering Co (The Wagon Mound (No 1)) [1961] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 1; [1961] AC 388 (PC); (The Wagon Mound (No 2)) [1966] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 657; [1967] 1 AC 617 (PC) 70, 101, 198

P Samuel & Co. Ltd v Dumas [1924] AC 431 ..................... 111, 127, 176, 177

Pacific Chemicals Pte Ltd v MSIG Insurance (Singapore) Pte Ltd. [2012] SGHC 198 ................................................................ 102, 193

Pan Atlantic Co. Ltd v Pine Top Insurance Co. Ltd [1994] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 427 .................................................................................. 236

Parker v National Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Society Ltd [2013] Lloyd’s Rep IR 253 208

Parker v Potts (1815) III Dow 23 225

Performance Cars v Abraham [1962] 1 QB 33 CA 81

Petroleo Brasileiro SA Petrobras v ENE 1 Kos Ltd (The Kos) [2012] UKSC 17; [2012] 2 AC 164 ...................................................... 111

Pickup v The Thames and Mersey Marine Insurance Company (1877–1878) LR 3 QBD 594................................................................. 226

Piermay Shipping Co. S.A. and Brandt’s Ltd. v Chester (The Michael) [1979] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 55 ........................................................ 209

Pink v Fleming (1890) L.R. 25 QBD 396 ........................................ 45, 49, 178

Polemis v Furness Withy & Co (1921) 8 LlL Rep 351; [1921] 3 KB 560 198

Polladio Holdings Limited v The New India Assurance Company Limited [2023] NZHC 1147 138

Prenn v Simmonds [1976] 1 WLR 1381 32

Promet Engineering (Singapore) Pte Ltd v Sturge (The Nukila) [1997] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 146 ............................................................. 148, 155

R (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2001] 2 AC 532 ............................................................................................... 33

R v Sally Clark [2003] EWCA Crim 1020 ................................................... 15

Rahman v Arearose Ltd [2001] QB 351 ....................................................... 82

Rainy Sky SA v Kookmin Bank [2011] 1 WLR 2900; [2011] UKSC 50 31

Re An Arbitration between Kate Scarr and the General Accident Assurance Corporation Ltd [1905] 1 KB 387 166

Re B (A Child) [2008] UKHL 35 206, 212

Re H (Minors) (Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) [1996] AC 563 ................................................................................ 206, 208, 212

Re London County Commercial Reinsurance Office Ltd [1922] 2 Ch 67 .................................................................................................147

Re Polemis (1921) 8 LlL Rep 351; [1921] 3 K.B. 560 .......................... 70, 101

Reeves v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2000] 1 AC 360 ....... 17

Regina Fur Company Ltd v Bossom [1958] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 425 ..................215

Reischer v Borwick [1894] 2 QB 548 48, 54, 75, 105

Rhesa Shipping Company SA v Edmunds (The Popi M) [1985] 1 WLR 948 205, 214, 216

Rockliffe Hall Ltd v Travelers Insurance Co Ltd [2021] EWHC 412 (Comm) .................................................................................. 35, 171

Romford Ice and Cold Storage Co Ltd v Lister [1956] 2 QB 180 ................ 64

Royal Boskalis Westminster & Ors v Mountain [1997] LRLR 523 .......... 238

Russian Bank for Foreign Trade v Excess Insurance Co. Ltd., [1918] 2 K.B. 123 ................................................................................ 180

SA v International General Insurance Co Ltd and Others (The “Irene EM”) [2013] EWHC 3644 (Comm) 153

Saint Line, Ltd. v Richardsons, Westgarth & Co., Ltd. (1940) 67 LlL Rep 62 ............................................................................................ 70

Schloss Brothers v Stevens [1906] 2 KB 665 ............................................ 145

Scott v Copenhagen Reinsurance Co. (UK) Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 688 ................................................................................................ 173

Seahawk Liquidating Trust v Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London 810 F3d 986 ........................................................................... 128

Sealion Shipping Ltd v Valiant Insurance Co. (The Toisa Pisces) [2012] EWHC 50 (Comm) 51, 157, 215

Seashore Marine SA v Phoenix Assurance Plc (The Vergina) (No. 1) [2001] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 719; (No. 2) [2001] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 698 58, 214

Secunda Marine Services Ltd v Liberty Mutual Insurance Company [2006] NSCA 82 ................................................................. 157

Shelbourne & Co. v Law Investment and Insurance Corporation [1898] 2 QB 626 .................................................................................. 178

Sheldon v Sun Alliance Australia Ltd (1990) 53 SASR 97 ........................ 208

Shell International Petroleum Co. Ltd. v Gibbs [1983] 2 AC 375 .......... 47, 58

Sienkiewicz v Greif (UK) Ltd [2011] UKSC 10 ................................... 90, 219

Skandia Insurance Co. Ltd v Skoljarev [1979] HCA 45 216, 225

Slattery v Mance (1962) 1 QB 676 205

Smellie v British General Insurance Co [1918] WC & Ins Rep 233 62

Smith New Court Securities Ltd v Citibank NA [1997] AC 254 17

Smith v Cornhill Insurance Co. Ltd (1938) 61 LlL Rep. 122 ....................... 67

Smith, Hogg v Black Sea & Baltic (1940) 67 LlL Rep 253; [1940] AC 997 .........................................................................................133, 162

Southampton Leisure Holdings Plc v Avon Insurance Plc [2004] EWHC 571 ............................................................................................ 67

Soya v White [1983] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 122 .............................. 109, 181, 184, 185

Spinney’s (1948) Ltd v Royal Insurance Co. Ltd [1980] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 406 66, 213

Spire Healthcare Limited v Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Limited [2022] EWCA Civ 17 198

Standard Life Assurance Ltd v Oak Dedicated Ltd [2008] 1 CLC 59 ...... 169

Stanley v Western Insurance Co. (1868) LR 3 Ex 71 ................................ 124

State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v Slade 747 So2d 293 ....................................143

State Farm Mutual Auto Ins Co. v Partridge 10 Cal3d 102 (1973) ... 136, 137

Steelton (No. 2) [1979] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 431 ................................................... 70

Stonegate Pub Co Ltd v MS Amlin Corporate Member Ltd and Others [2022] EWHC 2548 (Comm) 172, 201, 202

Strive Shipping Corporation v Hellenic Mutual War Risks Association [2002] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 88; [2003]1 CLC 401 191, 210

Suez Fortune Investments Ltd & Piraeus Bank AE v Talbot Underwriting Ltd & Ors, The Brilliante Virtuoso [2019] EWHC 2599 (Comm) ......................................................................... 177

Suez Investment Ltd v Talbot Underwriting Ltd (The Brillante Virtuoso) (No. 2) [2019] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 485 ................................ 210, 212

Sun Alliance & London Insurance Group v North West Iron Co. Ltd (1974) 2 NSWLR 625 .................................................................... 102

Sutherland Professional Funding Ltd v Bakewells (A Firm) [2011] EWHC 2658 (QB); [2013] Lloyd’s Rep IR 93 65, 169

Swiss Re International SE v LCA Marrickville Pty Ltd [2021] FCA 1206; [2022] ILRP 13 33, 171

Syarikat Takaful Malaysia Berhad v Global Process Systems Inc. [2011] UKSC 5, [2011] Bus LR 537 ......................... 18, 48, 104, 144, 151

Symington & Co. v Union Insurance Society of Canton Ltd (1928) 32 LlL Rep. 287 ....................................................................... 188

Tahir v Haringey Health Authority & Anr [1998] Lloyd’s Rep Med 104 ....... 85

Tatham v Hodgson (1796) 6 TR 656 177 [1921] 2 AC 41 ................... 181, 182

Taylor v Dunbar (1868–1869) LR 4 CP 206 ........................................ 45, 177

Ted Baker plc and Another v Axa Insurance UK plc and Others [2017] EWCA Civ 4097; [2017] Lloyd’s Rep IR 682 206, 228

Tektrol Ltd v International Insurance Co. of Hanover Ltd [2005] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 701 145

Thames and Mersey Marine Insurance Co. v Hamilton, Fraser & Co. (The Inchmaree) (1887) 12 App Cas 484 ...................... 149, 155, 156

Theodorou v Chester [1951] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 204 ........................................ 216

Thomas v London and Provincial Marine and General Insurance Co. Ltd (1914) 30 TLR 595 .................................................................. 164

Thomas v Tyne and Wear Steamship Freight Insurance Association [1917] 1 KB 938 ...............................................................161

Thompson v Hopper (1856) 6 E and B 172; (1858) El. Bl&El 1038 160, 163

Thompson v Whitmore (1810) 3 Taunton 227 151

Thurtell v Beaumont (1923) 15 LlLEep 186 .............................................. 207

TM Noten BV v Harding [1990] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 283 ................ 7, 131, 184, 185

Toomey v Banco Vitalicio de Espana SA de Seguros y Reasseguros [2004] EWCA Civ 622 .................................................. 232

Toomey v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd [1993] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 429 ........... 173

Transfield Shipping Inc v Mercator Shipping Inc (The Achilleas) [2008] UKHL 40; [2008] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 275; [2009] AC 61 198

Trinder, Anderson & Co. v Thames and Mersey Marine Insurance Company [1898] 2 QB 114 156, 174

UK Insurance Ltd v Gentry [2018] EWHC 37 .......................................... 212

UK Insurance Ltd v Holden [2019] UKSC 16 ............................................. 64

Utica National Insurance Co of Texas v American Indem Co 14 SW3d 198 (2004) ................................................................................ 128

Van Berlo v Aim Underwriting Limited Et Al 2014 ONSC 4648, 122 OR (3d) 315 .................................................................................. 169

Various Eateries Trading Ltd v Allianz Insurance plc [2022] EWHC 2549 (Comm) 201, 202

Vastgrand Industrial Ltd v Avon Insurance Plc [2004] HKCU 475 66

Vee H Aviation Pty Ltd v Australian Aviation Underwriting Pool Pty Ltd, 1995 ....................................................................................... 102

Versloot Dredging BV v HDI Gerling Industrie Versicherung AG [2013] EWHC 1666 (Comm); [2016] UKSC 45 ..................154, 158, 238

Visy Packaging Pty Ltd v Siegwerk Australia Pty Ltd [2013] FCA 231 ...................................................................................... 102, 224

W. v Minister of Pension [1946] 2 AU ER 301 ............................................ 17

Waddle v Wallsend Shipping Co [1952] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 105 225

Walker v Maitland (1821) 5 B&Al 171 49

Wasa International Insurance Co. Ltd v Lexington Insurance Co. [2009] UKHL 40 126

Watson v Clark (1813) I Dow 336 .............................................................. 225

Wayne Tank and Pump Co. Ltd V Employers Liability Assurance Corporation Ltd [1974] QB 57 .................... 103, 104, 108, 112–114, 116, 118, 121–122, 124, 131, 135–139, 142

West India and Panama Telegraph Company v Home and Colonial Marine Insurance Company (1880) 6 QBD 51 ..... 149, 156, 163

Whiting v New Zealand Insurance Co. Ltd [1932] 44 LlLR 179 ............... 185

Widefree Ltd v Brit Insurance Ltd [2009] EWHC 3671 (Comm) 228

Williams v University of Birmingham [2011] EWCA Civ 1242 90

Wilsher v Essex Area Health Authority [1988] AC 1074 84, 89

Winspear v Accident Insurance Co. (1880) 6 QBD 42 .............................. 165

Woods v Duncan [1946] A.C 401 ................................................................ 17

Wright v Cambridge Medical Group [2011] EWCA Civ 669 ...................... 94

X. v Minister of Pensions [1947] 1 All ER 38 ............................................. 17

Xantho (1887) 12 App Cas 503 ................................................... 149, 151, 152

Yorkshire Dale Steamship Co Ltd v Minister of War Transport [1942] AC 691 17, 49, 117

Young v Sun Alliance and London Insurance Ltd [1976] 3 All E.R. 561 ....................................................................................... 34

Zurich Insurance PLC UK Branch v International Energy Group Ltd (IEG) [2015] UKSC 33 ............................................................ 99, 100

Zurich Insurance PLC v Niramax Group Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 590 ...... 236

TABLE OF LEGISLATION

(bold = main textual ref; roman = footnoted)

Compensation Act 2006 91, 97, 99

s 3 ............................... 90, 219

Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations)

Act 2012 230

Employers’ Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969 97

s 1(1) ................................... 62

Insurance Act 2015 .................... 230

s 7(3) ................................. 236

s 8 ..................................... 236

s 9 ..................................... 232

s 10........................ 9, 232, 234

s 10(2) ............................... 232

s 11 9, 160, 232, 234, 235

s 11(3) 234

Marine Insurance

Act 1906 43 – 44, 49, 57, 65, 105 –106, 125, 129, 146, 148, 181, 182, 195, 230

s 2 ..................................... 149

s 3(2) ................................. 147

s 10...................................... 63

s 17 .................................... 236

s 18(2) 235

s 20(2) 235

s 33(1) 232

s 33(3) 165

s 39(5) ............... 133, 161, 163, 164, 165

s 55 9, 40, 41, 105, 133, 163, 165, 174, 198, 228, 231 s 55(1) 40, 105, 163, 174, 231

s 55(2) ................ 58, 145, 149, 173, 174, 177

s 55(2)(a) .................. 174, 176, 177, 189, 190

s 55(2)(b) ................... 178, 180

s 55(2)(c) ... 109, 110, 133, 180

s 61 41

s 67 194

s 67(1) 194

s 67(2) 194

ss 68-76 ............................. 194

s 77 ............................. 51, 194

s 78 ........................... 188, 194

s 78(4) ....................... 189, 191

Sch. 1 r. 7 .......................... 151

Sch. 1 r. 12 ........................ 149

Road Traffic Act 1972

s 5(1) 167

s 5(2) 167

Road Traffic Act 1988

s 145 64

s 145(3)(a) ..................... 62, 64

s 39.................................... 160 s 39(4) ............................... 160

Another random document with no related content on Scribd:

He was the Embodiment of the Spirit of the New South—From the “New York World,”

A Thoroughly American Journalist—From the “New York Herald,”

A Loss to the Whole Country—From the “New York Tribune,”

What Henry W. Grady Represented— From the “New York Commercial Advertiser,”

A Far-sighted Statesman—From the “New York Star,”

An Apostle of the New Faith—From the “New York Times,”

The Foremost Leader—From the “New York Christian Union,”

A Glorious Mission—From the “Albany, N.Y., Argus,”

His Lofty Ideal—From the “Philadelphia Press,”

His Patriotism—From the “Philadelphia Ledger,”

Oratory and the Press—From the “Boston Advertiser,”

The Lesson of Mr. Grady’s Life—From the “Philadelphia Times,”

His Loss a General Calamity—From the “St. Louis Globe-Democrat,”

Saddest of Sequels—From the “Manchester, N.H., Union,” 461

A Life of Promise—From the “Chicago Inter-Ocean,” 462

Electrified the Whole Country—From the “Pittsburg Dispatch,” 464

A Large Brain and a Large Heart—From the “Elmira, N.Y., Advertiser,” 465

The Model Citizen—From the “Boston Globe,” 467

A Loyal Unionist—From the “Chicago Times,” 468

His Work was Not in Vain—From the “Cleveland, O., Plaindealer,” 468

The Best Representative of the New South—From the “Albany, N.Y., Journal,” 469

A Lamentable Loss to the Country—From the “Cincinnati Commercial Gazette,” 470

A Sad Loss—From the “Buffalo, N.Y., Express,” 471

Words of Virgin Gold—From the “Oswego, N.Y., Palladium,” 473

Sad News—From the “Boston Advertiser,” 475

A Leader of Leaders—From the “Philadelphia Times,” 477

A Forceful Advocate—From the “Springfield, Mass., Republican,” 479

His Great Work—From the “Boston Post,” 480

New England’s Sorrow—From the “Boston Herald,” 482

A Noble Life Ended—From the 484

“Philadelphia Telegraph,”

A Typical Southerner—From the “Chicago Tribune,”

His Name a Household Possession— From the “Independence, Mo., Sentinel,”

Editor, Orator, Statesman, Patriot—From the “Kansas City Globe,”

A Southern Bereavement—From the “Cincinnati Times-Star,” 490

A Man Who will be Missed, 491

At the Beginning of a Great Career—From the “Pittsburg Post,” 493

The Peace-Makers—From the “New York Churchman,”

One of the Brightest—From the “Seattle Press,” 495

The South’s Noble Son—From the “Rockland, Me., Opinion,” 496

Brilliant and Gifted—Dr. H. M. Field in “New York Evangelist,” 497

The Death of Henry W. Grady—John Boyle O’Reilly in the “Boston Pilot,” 499

TRIBUTES OF THE SOUTHERN PRESS.

A Noble Death—From the “Jacksonville, Fla., Times-Union,” 505

There Was None Greater—From the “Birmingham, Mo., Chronicle,” 507

A Great Leader Has Fallen—From the “Raleigh, N.C., State Chronicle,” 509

N.H.From the “New Orleans TimesDemocrat,” 514

Second to None—From the “Louisville Courier-Journal,” 517

A Loss to the South—From the “Louisville Post,” 519

The Death of Henry W. Grady, 520

Universal Sorrow—From the “Nashville American,” 522

The Highest Place—From the “Charleston News and Courier,” 524

A Brilliant Career—From the “Baltimore Sun,” 526

A Public Calamity—From the “Selma Times and Mail,” 528

Grief Tempers To-day’s Joy—From the “Austin, Tex., Statesman,” 530

Henry Grady’s Death—From the “Charleston Evening Sun,” 532

Two Dead Men—From the “Greenville, N.C., News,” 533

Grady’s Renown—From the “Birmingham 535

News,”

Henry W. Grady—From the “Augusta Chronicle,” 537

True and Loyal—From the “Athens Banner,” 543

Mr. Grady’s Death—From the “Savannah Times,” 544

A Great Loss to Georgia—From the “Columbia Enquirer-Sun,” 545

The Man Eloquent—From the “Rome Tribune,” 547

Death of Henry W. Grady—From the “Savannah News,” 549

Henry W. Grady Dead—From the “Albany News and Advertiser,” 551

Stilled is the Eloquent Tongue—From the “Brunswick Times,” 553

A Shining Career—From the “Macon Telegraph,” 554

The Greatest Calamity—From the “Augusta News,” 557

No Ordinary Grief—From the “Columbus Ledger,” 559

A Place Hard to Fill—From the “Griffin News,” 559

“Just Human”—From the “Thomasville Enterprise,” 560

Georgia Weeps—From the “Union News,” 561

A Grand Mission—From the “West Point Press,” 563

The South Loved Him—From the “Darien Timber Gazette,” 564

No Sadder News—From the “Marietta Journal,” 565

Georgia’s Noble Son—From the “Madison Advertiser,” 566

The Death of Henry Grady—From the “Hawkinsville Dispatch,” 569

A Measureless Sorrow—From the “Lagrange Reporter,” 572

Grady’s Death—From the “Oglethorpe Echo,” 573

He Loved his Country—From the “Cuthbert Liberal,” 574

A Resplendent Record—From the “Madison Madisonian,” 575

Dedicated to Humanity—From the “Sandersville Herald and Georgian,” 576

The South Laments—From the “Middle Georgia Progress,” 578

His Career—From the “Dalton Citizen,” 579

Our Fallen Hero—From the “Hartwell Sun,” 581

A Deathless Name—From the “Gainesville Eagle,” 582

A Great Soul—From the “Baxley Banner,” 583

In Memoriam—From the “Henry Co. Times,” 585

A People Mourn—From the “Warrenton Clipper,” 587

Henry W. Grady is No More—From the “Valdosta Times,” 589

“Maybe his Work is Finished”—From the 590

“Dalton Argus,”

He Never Offended—From the “Washington Chronicle,” 592

The South in Mourning—From the “Elberton Star,” 593

Stricken at its Zenith—From the “Greenesboro Herald and Journal,” 594

The Southland Mourns—From the “Griffin Morning Call,” 596

THE “CONSTITUTION” AND ITS WORK, 601

LETTERS AND TELEGRAMS FROM DISTINGUISHED PERSONS.

Hon. Chauncey M. Depew, 623

Ex-President Cleveland, 624

Hon. A. S. Colyar, 625

Hon. Murat Halstead, 626

Hon. Samuel J. Randall, 627

Mr. Andrew Carnegie, 627

Hon. Edward S. Bradford, 628

Mr. J. H. Parker, 628

Hon. Alonzo B. Cornell, 628

Mr. Ballard Smith, 628

IN MEMORIAM.

IT is within the bounds of entire accuracy to say that the death of no man ever created a deeper and more universal sorrow than that which responded to the announcement that H W G had paid his final debt of nature, and was gone to his last account. The sense of grief and regret attained the dignity of a national bereavement, and was at one and the same time both public and personal. The young and gifted Georgian had made a great impression upon his country and his time; blending an individuality, picturesque, strong and attractive, and an eloquence as rarely solid as it was rhetorically fine, into a character of the first order of eminence and brilliancy. In every section of the Union, the people felt that a noble nature and a splendid intellect had been subtracted from the nation’s stock of wisdom and virtue. This feeling was intensified the nearer it approached the region where he was best known and honored: but it reached the farthest limits of the land, and was expressed by all classes and parties with an homage equally ungrudging and sincere.

In Georgia, and throughout the Southern States, it rose to a lamentation. He was, indeed, the hope and expectancy of the young South, the one publicist of the New South, who, inheriting the spirit of the old, yet had realized the present, and looked into the future, with the eyes of a statesman and the heart of a patriot. His own future was fully assured. He had made his place; had won his spurs; and he possessed the qualities, not merely to hold them, but greatly to magnify their importance. That he should be cut down upon the

threshold of a career, for whose magnificent development and broad usefulness all was prepared, seemed a cruel dispensation of Providence and aroused a heart-breaking sentiment far beyond the bounds compassed by Mr. Grady’s personality.

Of the details of his life, and of his life-work, others have spoken in the amplest terms. I shall, in this place, content myself with placing on the record my own remembrance and estimate of the man as he was known to me. Mr. Grady became a writer for the press when but little more than a boy, and during the darkest days of the Reconstruction period. There was in those days but a single political issue for the South. Our hand was in the lion’s mouth, and we could do nothing, hope for nothing, until we got it out. The young Georgian was ardent, impetuous, the son of a father slain in battle, the offspring of a section, the child of a province; yet he rose to the situation with uncommon faculties of courage and perception; caught the spirit of the struggle against reaction with perfect reach; and threw himself into the liberal and progressive movements of the time with the genius of a man born for both oratory and affairs. At first, his sphere of work was confined to the newspapers of the South. But, not unreasonably or unnaturally, he wished a wider field of duty, and went East, carrying letters in which he was commended in terms which might have seemed extravagant then, but which he more than vindicated. His final settlement in the capital of his native State, and in a position where he could speak directly and responsibly, gave him the opportunity he had sought to make a name and fame for himself, and an audience of his own. Here he carried the policy with which he had early identified himself to its finest conclusions; coming at once to the front as a champion of a free South and a united country, second to none in efficiency, equaled by none in eloquence.

He was eager and aspiring, and, in the heedlessness of youth, with its aggressive ambitions, may not have been at all times discriminating and considerate in the objects of his attacks; but he was generous to a fault, and, as he advanced upon the highway, he broadened with it and to it, and, if he had lived, would have realized the fullest measure of his own promise and the hopes of his friends. The scales of error, when error he felt he had committed, were fast

falling from his eyes, and he was frank to own his changed, or changing, view. The vista of the way ahead was opening before him with its far perspective clear to his mental sight. He had just delivered an utterance of exceeding weight and value, winning universal applause, and was coming home to be welcomed by his people with open arms, when the Messenger of Death summoned him to his God. The tidings of the fatal termination of his disorder, so startling in their suddenness and unexpectedness, added to the last scene of all a feature of dramatic interest.

For my own part, I can truly say that I was from the first and always proud of him, hailed him as a young disciple who had surpassed his elders in learning and power, recognized in him a master voice and soul, followed his career with admiring interest, and recorded his triumphs with ever-increasing sympathy and appreciation. We had broken a lance or two between us; but there had been no lick below the belt, and no hurt which was other than skin-deep, and during considerably more than a year before his death a most cordial and unreserved correspondence had passed between us. The telegram which brought the fatal news was a grievous shock to me, for it told me that I had lost a good friend, and the cause of truth a great advocate. It is with a melancholy satisfaction that I indite these lines, thankful for the opportunity afforded me to do so by the kindness of his associates and family. Such spirits are not of a generation, but of an epoch; and it will be long before the South will find one to take the place made conspicuously vacant by his absence.

H W.

L, February 9, 1890.

THE HOME OF GRADY’S BOYHOOD, ATHENS.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF HENRY W. GRADY.

B J C H.

ORDINARILY, it is not a difficult matter to write a biographical sketch. Here are the dates, one in faded ink in an old Bible, the other glistening under the morning sun, or the evening stars, on the cold gravestone. Here is the business, the occupation, the profession, success or failure—a little scrap of paper here and there, and beyond and above everything, the fact of death; of death that, in a pitiful way, becomes as perfunctory as any other fact or event. Ordinarily, there is no difficulty in grouping these things, throwing in a word of eulogy here and there, and sympathizing in a formal way with the friends and relatives and the community in general.

But to give adequate shape to even the slightest sketch of the unique personality and the phenomenal career of Henry Woodfin Grady, who died, as it were, but yesterday, is well-nigh impossible; for here was a life that has no parallel in our history, productive as our institutions have been of individuality. A great many Americans have achieved fame in their chosen professions,—have won distinction and commanded the popular approval, but here is a career which is so unusual as to have no precedent. In recalling to

mind the names of those who have been most conspicuously successful in touching the popular heart, one fact invariably presents itself—the fact of office. It is not, perhaps, an American fact peculiarly, but it seems to be so, since the proud and the humble, the great and the small, all seem willing to surrender to its influence. It is the natural order of things that an American who is ambitious—who is willing, as the phrase goes, to serve the people (and it is a pretty as well as a popular phrase)—should have an eye on some official position, more or less important, which he would be willing to accept even at a sacrifice if necessary This is the American plan, and it has been so sanctified by history and custom that the modern reformers, who propose to apply a test of fitness to the office-seekers, are hooted at as Pharisees. After our long and promiscuous career of office-seeking and office-holding, a test of fitness seems to be a monarchical invention which has for its purpose the destruction of our republican institutions.

It is true that some of the purest and best men in our history have held office, and have sought it, and this fact gives additional emphasis to one feature of Henry Grady’s career. He never sought office, and he was prompt to refuse it whenever it was brought within his reach. On one occasion a tremendous effort was made to induce him to become a candidate for Congress in the Atlanta district. The most prominent people in the district urged him, his friends implored him, and a petition largely signed was presented to him. Never before in Georgia has a citizen been formally petitioned by so large a number of his fellow-citizens to accept so important an office. Mr Grady regarded the petition with great curiosity. He turned it over in his mind and played with it in a certain boyish and impulsive way that belonged to everything he did and that was one of the most charming elements of his character. His response to the petition is worth giving here. He was, as he said, strongly tempted to improve a most flattering opportunity. He then goes on to read a lesson to the young men of the South that is still timely, though it was written in 1882. He says:

When I was eighteen years of age, I adopted journalism as my profession. After thirteen years of service, in which I have had various fortunes, I can say that I have never seen a day when I regretted my choice On the contrary, I have seen the field of journalism so enlarged, its possibilities so widened, and its influence so extended, that I have come to believe earnestly that no man, no matter what his calling, his elevation, or his opportunity, can equal in dignity, honor and usefulness the journalist who comprehends his position, fairly measures his duties, and gives himself entirely and unselfishly to his work But journalism is a jealous profession, and demands the fullest allegiance of those who seek its honors or emoluments. Least of all things can it be made the aid of the demagogue, or the handmaid of the politician. The man who uses his journal to subserve his political ambition, or writes with a sinister or personal purpose, soon loses his power, and had best abandon a profession he has betrayed. Within my memory there are frequent and striking examples of men who have sacrificed the one profession, only to be sacrificed in the other. History has not recorded the name of a single man who has been great enough to succeed in both. Therefore, devoted as I am to my profession, believing as I do that there is more of honor and usefulness for me along its way than in another path, and that my duty is clear and unmistakable, I am constrained to reaffirm in my own mind and to declare to you the resolution I made when I entered journalism, namely, that as long as I remain in its ranks I will never become a candidate for any political office, or draw a dollar from any public treasury This rule I have never broken, and I hope I never shall As a matter of course, every young man of health and spirit must have ambition, I think it has been the curse of the South that our young men have considered little else than political preferment worthy of an ambitious thought. There is a fascination about the applause of the hustings that is hard to withstand. Really, there is no career that brings so much of unhappiness and discontent so much of subservience, sacrifice, and uncertainty as that of the politician. Never did the South offer so little to her young men in the direction of politics as she does at present. Never did she offer so much in other directions. As for me, my ambition is a simple one. I shall be satisfied with the labors of my life if, when those labors are over, my son, looking abroad upon a better and grander Georgia a Georgia that has filled the destiny God intended her for when her towns and cities are hives of industry, and her country-side the exhaustless fields from which their stores are drawn when every stream dances on its way to the music of spindles, and every forest echoes back the roar of the passing train—when her valleys smile with abundant harvests, and from her hillsides come the tinkling of bells as her herds and flocks go forth from their folds—when more than two million

people proclaim her perfect independence, and bless her with their love I shall be more than content, I say, if my son, looking upon such scenes as these, can stand up and say:

“My father bore a part in this work, and his name lives in the memory of this people.”

While I am forced, therefore, to decline to allow the use of my name as you request, I cannot dismiss your testimonial, unprecedented, I believe, in its character and compass, without renewing my thanks for the generous motives that inspired it Life can bring me no sweeter satisfaction than comes from this expression of confidence and esteem from the people with whom I live, and among whom I expect to die You have been pleased to commend the work I may have done for the old State we love so well. Rest assured that you have to-day repaid me amply for the past, and have strengthened me for whatever duty may lie ahead.

Brief as it is, this is a complete summary of Mr. Grady’s purpose so far as politics were concerned. It is the key-note of his career. He was ambitious—he was fired with that “noble discontent,” born of genius, that spurs men to action, but he lacked the selfishness that leads to office-seeking. It is not to be supposed, however, that he scorned politics. He had unbounded faith in the end and aim of certain principles of government, and he had unlimited confidence in the honesty and justice of the people and in the destiny of the American Union—in the future of the Republic.

What was the secret of his popularity? By what methods did he win the affections of people who never saw his face or heard his voice? His aversion to office was not generally known—indeed, men who regarded him in the light of rivalry, and who had access to publications neither friendly nor appreciative, had advertised to the contrary. By them it was hinted that he was continually seeking office and employing for that purpose all the secret arts of the demagogue. Yet, in the face of these sinister intimations, he died the best beloved and the most deeply lamented man that Georgia has ever produced, and, to crown it all, he died a private citizen, sacrificing his life in behalf of a purpose that was neither personal nor sectional, but grandly national in its aims.

In the last intimate conversation he had with the writer of this, Mr Grady regretted that there were people in Georgia who misunderstood his motives and intentions. We were on the train going from Macon to Eatonton, where he was to speak.

“I am going to Eatonton solely because you seem to have your heart set on it,” he said. “There are people who will say that I am making a campaign in my own behalf, and you will hear it hinted that I am going about the State drumming up popularity for the purpose of running for some office.”

The idea seemed to oppress him, and though he never bore malice against a human being, he was keenly hurt at any interpretation of his motives that included selfishness or self-seeking among them. In this way, he was often deeply wounded by men who ought to have held up his hands.

When he died, those who had wronged him, perhaps unintentionally, by attributing to him a selfish ambition that he never had, were among the first to do justice to his motives. Their haste in this matter (there are two instances in my mind) has led me to believe that their instinct at the last was superior to their judgment. I have recently read again nearly all the political editorials contributed to the Constitution by Mr Grady during the last half-dozen years. Taken together, they make a remarkable showing. They manifest an extraordinary growth, not in style or expression—for all the graces of composition were fully developed in Mr. Grady’s earliest writings— but in lofty aim, in the high and patriotic purpose that is to be found at its culmination in his Boston speech. I mention the Boston speech because it is the last serious effort he made. Reference might just as well have been made to the New England speech, or to the Elberton speech, or to the little speech he delivered at Eatonton, and which was never reported. In each and all of these there is to be found the qualities that are greater than literary nimbleness or rhetorical fluency—the qualities that kindle the fires of patriotism and revive and restore the love of country.

In his Eatonton speech, Mr. Grady was particularly happy in his references to a restored Union and a common country, and his

earnestness and his eloquence were as conscientious there as if he were speaking to the largest and most distinguished audience in the world, and as if his address were to be printed in all the newspapers of the land. I am dwelling on these things in order to show that there was nothing affected or perfunctory in Mr. Grady’s attitude. He had political enemies in the State—men who, at some turn in their career, had felt the touch and influence of his hand, or thought they did— and these men were always ready, through their small organs and mouthpieces, to belittle his efforts and to dash their stale small beer across the path of this prophet of the New South, who strove to impress his people with his own brightness and to lead them into the sunshine that warmed his own life and made it beautiful. Perhaps these things should not be mentioned in a sketch that can only be general in its nature; and yet they afford a key to Mr. Grady’s character; they supply the means of getting an intimate glimpse of his motives. That the thoughtless and ill-tempered criticisms of his contemporaries wounded him is beyond question. They troubled him greatly, and he used to talk about them to his co-workers with the utmost freedom. But they never made him malicious. He always had some excuse to offer for those who misinterpreted him, and no attack, however bitter, was ever made on his motives, that he could not find a reasonable excuse for in some genial and graceful way.

The great point about this man was that he never bore malice. His heart was too tender and his nature too generous. The small jealousies, and rivalries, and envies that appertain to life, and, indeed, are a definite part of it, never touched him in the slightest degree. He was conscious of the growth of his powers, and he watched their development with the curiosity and enthusiasm of a boy, but the egotism that is based on arrogance or self-esteem he had no knowledge of. The consciousness of the purity of his motives gave him strength and power in a direction where most other public men are weak. This same consciousness gave a breadth, an ardor, and an impulsiveness to his actions and utterances that seem to be wholly lacking in the lives of other public men who have won the applause of the public. The secret of this it would be difficult to define. When his companions in the office insisted that it was his duty to prepare at least an outline of his speeches so that the