Insurance and transport law : controlling insurance contract terms : Section 54 of the Insurance Contracts Act – compliance, recovery and accountability

Commonwealth legislation covering insurance contracts contains numerous provisions designed to control the operation and effect of terms in life and general insurance contracts. For example, the Life Insurance Act 1995 (Cth) contains provisions regulating the consequences attendant upon incorrect statements in proposals [1] and non-payment of premiums, [2] provides that an insurer may only exclude liability in the case of suicide if it has made express provision for such contingency in its policy, [3] and severely restricts the efficacy of conditions as to war risks. [4] The Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) is even more intrusive and has a major impact upon contractual provisions in the general insurance field. It is beyond the scope of this note to explore all of these provisions in any detail but examples of controls and constraints imposed upon the operation and effect of contractual provisions include the following. A party is precluded from relying upon a provision in a contract of insurance if such reliance would amount to a failure to act with the utmost good faith. [5] Similarly, a policy provision which requires differences or disputes arising out of the insurance to be submitted to arbitration is void, [6] unless the insurance is a genuine cover for excess of loss over and above another specified insurance. [7] Similarly clause such as conciliation clauses, [8] average clauses, [9] and unusual terms [10] are given qualified operation. [11] However the provision in the Insurance Contracts Act that has the greatest impact upon, and application to, a wide range of insurance clauses and claims is s 54. This section has already generated a significant volume of case law and is the focus of this note. In particular this note examines two recent cases. The first, Johnson v Triple C Furniture and Electrical Pty Ltd [2012] 2 Qd R 337, (hereafter the Triple C case), is a decision of the Queensland Court of Appeal; and the second, Matthew Maxwell v Highway Hauliers Pty Ltd [2013] WASCA 115, (hereafter the Highway Hauliers case), is a decision of the Court of Appeal in Western Australia. This latter decision is on appeal to the High Court of Australia. The note considers too the decision of the New South Wales Court of Appeal in Prepaid Services Pty Ltd v Atradius Credit Insurance NV [2013] NSWCA 252 (hereafter the Prepaid Services case).These cases serve to highlight the complex nature of s 54 and its application, as well as the difficulty in achieving a balance between an insurer and an insured's reasonable expectations.

Disclosure under the prescribed insurance contracts regime : Section 35 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 and consumer protection revisited

Section 35 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 requires insurers offering insurance policies in six prescribed areas "to clearly inform" prospective insureds of any departure their policies may constitute from the standard covers established by the Act and its accompanying Regulations. This prescribed insurance contracts regime was designed to remedy comprehension problems generated by the length and complexity of insurance documents and to alleviate misunderstanding over the terms and conditions of individual policies. This article examines the rationale underpinning s 35 and the prescribed insurance contracts regime and looks at the operation of the legislation with particular reference to home contents insurance in Australia. It is argued that the means whereby disclosure of derogation from standard cover may be effected largely negates the thrust of the prescribed insurance contract reform. Recommendations to address these operational deficiencies are made.

Accountability 30 years on: Insurance Contracts Act Reform

The Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) since inception has effected major reform to the law in this field. One of Australia’s most frequently cited pieces of legislation, it has had a major impact upon the law and practice of insurance. Given the importance of insurance to domestic and commercial activity and its pivotal position as a mechanism to manage exposure to risk, it is not surprising that this legislation has been the subject of extensive analysis in the courts and in legal literature. Furthermore the Act has, arising out of a 2009 review, been significantly amended by the Insurance Contracts Amendment Act 2013 (Cth). The principal amendments introduced are: two-fold: the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) has been amended so that a failure to comply with the duty of good faith is now a breach of the Act; and disclosure and misrepresentation provisions under the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) are amended and clarified.

The insured's non-disclosure in the formation of insurance contracts : a comparative perspective

The requirements that an insured disclose all facts material to a transaction as well as not misrepresent material facts in the formation of an insurance contract are universal requirements of insurance law. The nature and extent of these obligations varies from one jurisdiction to the next. Disclosure in the insurance context is distinct from the general approach in commercial contracts, and in others between persons dealing at arm's length. It is the purpose of this article therefore to examine, on a comparative basis, the approaches adopted in the Anglo-Commonwealth context of England, Australia New Zealand and Singapore to the resolution of disclose issues in the formation of insurance contracts. Particular attention is focused on the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Australia) as this statue effects the most significant overhaul of the common law and the National Consumer Council in the United Kingdom has advocated that similar reforms be adopted.

Accountability of insurers under s 54: Striking the balance between commerciality and consumer protection

Section 54 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) continues to occupy a prominent position in insurance-related litigation. This section which imposes a concept of causation, or prejudice to the insurer, to restrict an insurer’s reliance upon contractual terms to avoid liability for particular claims, is often before the courts. This note focuses upon the recent High Court of Australia decision in Maxwell v Highway Hauliers Pty Ltd [2014] HCA 33.

Respecting contractual intentions : balancing consumer expectations with the sanctity of contract in the context of standard form insurance contracts

It is the purpose of this article to examine the means curently available to judges to achieve a workable balance between providing appropriate consumer protection to signatories of standard form contractors while still retaining adequate respect for the sanctity of contract, and, based on this analysis, to determine whether a significantly greater scope of contract (re)construction is likely to become the norm in most common law jurisdictions in the coming decades.

Disclosure and concealment in consumer insurance contracts

This book provides an in-depth examination of the theoretical,legal, social and economic foundations to disclosure and concealment of information in relation to the formation of consumer insurance contracts. A comparative treatment of this issue is undertaken with particular attention given to the judicial and legislative approaches adopted in the United Kingdom, the United States of America, Australia and New Zealand.

Floods, earthquakes and insurance coverage : issues, problems and solutions

The recent floods in Queensland and elsewhere in Australia as well as the recent earthquakes in New Zealand have again given rise to very significant uninsured losses. This article looks at the issue of cover protection against catastrophes such as floods and earthquakes affecting home buildings and contents insurance and the standard cover provisions of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth). It points also to the possibility of a national scheme to cover natural disasters including floods.

Quantil Hedging for telegraph markets and its applications to a pricing of equity-linked life insurance contracts

En este documento está desarrollado un modelo de mercado financiero basado en movimientos aleatorios con tiempo continuo, con velocidades constantes alternantes y saltos cuando hay cambios en la velocidad. Si los saltos en la dirección tienen correspondencia con la dirección de la velocidad del comportamiento aleatorio subyacente, con respecto a la tasa de interés, el modelo no presenta arbitraje y es completo. Se construye en detalle las estrategias replicables para opciones, y se obtiene una presentación cerrada para el precio de las opciones. Las estrategias de cubrimiento quantile para opciones son construidas. Esta metodología es aplicada al control de riesgo y fijación de precios de instrumentos de seguros.

Non-monotone insurance contracts and their empirical consequences

The goal of this paper is to show the possibility of a non-monotone relation between coverage ans risk which has been considered in the literature of insurance models since the work of Rothschild and Stiglitz (1976). We present an insurance model where the insured agents have heterogeneity in risk aversion and in lenience (a prevention cost parameter). Risk aversion is described by a continuous parameter which is correlated with lenience and for the sake of simplicity, we assume perfect correlation. In the case of positive correlation, the more risk averse agent has higher cosr of prevention leading to a higher demand for coverage. Equivalently, the single crossing property (SCP) is valid and iplies a positive correlation between overage and risk in equilibrium. On the other hand, if the correlation between risk aversion and lenience is negative, not only may the SCP be broken, but also the monotonocity of contracts, i.e., the prediction that high (low) risk averse types choose full (partial) insurance. In both cases riskiness is monotonic in risk aversion, but in the last case there are some coverage levels associated with two different risks (low and high), which implies that the ex-ante (with respect to the risk aversion distribution) correlation between coverage and riskiness may have every sign (even though the ex-post correlation is always positive). Moreover, using another instrument (a proxy for riskiness), we give a testable implication to desentangle single crossing ans non single croosing under an ex-post zero correlation result: the monotonicity of coverage as a function os riskiness. Since by controlling for risk aversion (no asymmetric information), coverage is monotone function of riskiness, this also fives a test for asymmetric information. Finally, we relate this theoretical results to empirical tests in the recent literature, specially the Dionne, Gouruéroux and Vanasse (2001) work. In particular, they found an empirical evidence that seems to be compatible with asymmetric information and non single crossing in our framework. More generally, we build a hidden information model showing how omitted variables (asymmetric information) can bias the sign of the correlation of equilibrium variables conditioning on all observable variables. We show that this may be the case when the omitted variables have a non-monotonic relation with the observable ones. Moreover, because this non-dimensional does not capture this deature. Hence, our main results is to point out the importance of the SPC in testing predictions of the hidden information models.

Tentative drafts of Workmen's Compensation Act. Act creating bureau to enforce workmen's compensation act. Act creating state insurance fund. Act regulating policies of insurance against liability arising under article III of the Workmen's Compensation Act. Act authorizing the creation of mutual liability insurance associations. Act exempting farm and domestic employees from Workmen's Compensation Act. Joint resolution amending the constitution of Pennsylvania.

Mode of access: Internet.

Title 41, Pt. 50-204, Section II. Radiation safety and health standards for Federal supply contracts, under the Walsh-Healey Public Contracts Act.

Mode of access: Internet.