ALLIANZ AUSTRALIA LTD v WENTWORTHVILLE REAL ESTATE PTY LTD & 2 ORS [2004] NSWCA 100

ALLIANZ AUSTRALIA LTD v WENTWORTHVILLE REAL ESTATE PTY LTD & 2 ORS [2004] NSWCA 100

The claim by the Khourys against Starr Partners was for contribution and/or indemnity for economic loss, not directly for bodily injury; thus it fell outside Exclusion (k) of the policy and the important note in the proposal was not a contract term.

Parties
Appellant: Allianz Australia Ltd; First Respondent: Wentworthville Real Estate Pty Ltd t/as Starr Partners (Wentworthville); Second Respondent: Second Respondent; Third Respondent: Third Respondent
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Insurance Exclusion Clauses, Indemnity, Professional Indemnity Policy, Contra Proferentem, Contract Interpretation
Insurance Law Insurance Exclusion Clauses Indemnity Professional Indemnity Policy Contra Proferentem Contract Interpretation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Allianz Australia Ltd

Appellant

Wentworthville Real Estate Pty Ltd t/as Starr Partners (Wentworthville)

First Respondent

Second Respondent

Second Respondent

Third Respondent

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Exclusion (k) of the policy excluded indemnity for the claim against Starr Partners
  2. 2 Whether the important note in the proposal was incorporated into the contract of insurance
  3. 3 Whether the contra proferentem rule applied to construe exclusion clauses

Ratio Decidendi

The claim by the Khourys against Starr Partners was for contribution and/or indemnity for economic loss, not directly for bodily injury; thus it fell outside Exclusion (k) of the policy and the important note in the proposal was not a contract term.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.