Ali v Insurance Australia Limited [2022] NSWCA 174

Court Supplied Summary

Insurance — property insurance — home and contents — where claim by policyholder made following break-in at home — where drafting in policy used the word ‘cover’ throughout — whether cause of action for damages arose at the time of property damage or upon determination of claim — whether claim against policy barred by Limitation Act 1969 (NSW), s 14 — whether ‘cover’ where used in policy interchangeable with ‘indemnify’

Tim Castle SC appeared for the Applicant.

Reasons for the decision can be found here.

Worth v International Insurance Company of Hannover SE [2020] NSWSC 249

INSURANCE – house fire – claim for indemnity – whether insured responsible for fire – circumstantial case – good faith in taking of defence alleging lack of reasonable dispatch in rectifying property.

Tim Castle and Peter Mann represented the Plaintiff.

Reasons for the decision can be found here.

R & B Directional Drilling Pty Ltd (in liq) v CGU Insurance Limited (No 2) [2019] FCA 458

INSURANCE – commercial general liability insurance – construction subcontract – defective works – distinction between loss of use and physical injury – distinction between “injury” and “physical injury” – no physical injury to tangible property – application dismissed

INSURANCE – exclusions – property in physical or legal control – tunnel was in physical control of applicant

INSURANCE – exclusions – faulty workmanship – insurer will not pay anything in respect of performing, correcting or improving any work undertaken – consequential costs

INSURANCE – exclusions – contractual liability – within ordinary limits of liability

Tim Castle represented the Applicants.

Reasons for the decision can be found here.

QBE Underwriting Ltd as Managing Agent for Lloyds Syndicate 386 v Southern Colliery Maintenance Pty Ltd (2018) 97 NSWLR 459

INSURANCE— Liability insurance — Exclusions — Where insured entered agreement with third party containing warranties and agreement to indemnify — Whether insured would have been liable in absence of such agreement.

INSURANCE —  Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) — Duty of disclosure — Scope and duration — Where insurer disclosed to insured letter warning of possible obligations to indemnify third parties —  Insurance Contracts Act 1984  (Cth), s 21.

CONTRACTS — Construction — Interpretation — “‘For’” — “‘In respect of’” — Whether contract of insurance extended to indemnity for adverse costs order.

Tim Castle represented the Respondent.

Reasons for the judgement can be found here.

Global Constructions Australia Pty Ltd (in liq) v AIG Australia Limited [2018] FCA 98

INSURANCE — construction of policy — claim for direct financial loss — theft or fraudulent acts by a shareholder — limit of liability — set-off of shareholder's loan account against direct financial loss — set-off to be applied prior to applying limit of liability.

Tim Castle represented the Applicant.

Reasons for the judgement can be found here.

Watkins Syndicate 0457 at Lloyds v Pantaenius Australia Pty Ltd [2016] FCAFC

INSURANCE - operation of s 54 of Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) on claim for contribution between the insurers where the second policy would respond to claim by insured invoking s 54 -whether s 54 applied to the claim by the insured - whether the operation of s 54 meant the appellant was not able to refuse to pay the claim made by the insured - whether the respondent insurer could set up putative liability of the appellant to the insured as a basis for a claim for contribution by it - appeal dismissed

Tim D. Castle appeared for the respondent.

Watkins Syndicate 0457 at Lloyds v Pantaenius Australia Pty Ltd and Others [2016] FCAFC 150

INSURANCE — Contribution — Claim for contribution between insurers — Where insured covered by one policy in terms and one by operation of s 54 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) — Whether suspension of cover an inherent limitation on claims — Whether s 54 operates only for benefit of insured — Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth), s 54.

Tim Castle represented the Respondent.

Reasons for the judgement can be found here.

Lambert Leasing Inc. v QBE Insurance (Australia) Ltd [2016] NSWCA 254

INSURANCE – whether insured obliged to provide insurer with documents to enable insurer to determine whether conditions precedent to cover satisfied – insured claimed legal professional privilege in respect of documents – whether proceedings commenced prematurely

EVIDENCE – further evidence – whether documents in respect of which legal professional privilege was claimed at trial may be tendered on appeal

INSURANCE – double insurance – both policies contain “other insurance” clauses – whether s 45 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) requires the insured to have “entered into” both contracts of insurance – whether insured has “entered into” both contracts of insurance

INSURANCE – double insurance – whether insurer A entitled to resist providing indemnity on the basis that insured had already been indemnified by insurer B – effect of deed which purported to re-characterise indemnity provided by insurer B as a limited recourse loan

CONTRACT – construction of the word “use” in indemnity clause in sale agreement – whether “use” has particular or special meaning under Virginian law – whether “use” encompassed leasing of aircraft or paying for maintenance pursuant to contractual obligation

Chris Ward SC appeared for the appellants.

Steven Cominos appeared for the second and third respondents.

Abdul-Rahman v WorkCover Authority of NSW [2015] NSWSC 1483

CIVIL LAW - workers compensation insurance – requirement for employer to hold current policy – debt or civil penalty arising from failure of employer to hold policy – relevant limitation period – appeal against decision of Magistrate – whether action constituted “proceedings for an offence” – whether Magistrate so found – submission that Court bound by purported finding – submission rejected – combative approach to litigation – whether notice of contention should be permitted – conflicting versions of conversations between counsel – when cause of action accrued to the Authority – ambiguity in legislation – appeal allowed.

David Rayment represented the Respondent.