AYOUB AND ANOR v LOMBARD INSURANCE CO (AUST) LTD [1992] NSWCA 19

AYOUB AND ANOR v LOMBARD INSURANCE CO (AUST) LTD [1992] NSWCA 19

The non-disclosure by the appellants of the previous insurer's refusal to insure was a fact relevant to the insurer's decision as contemplated by the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth). This entitled the respondent insurer to reduce its liability to nil. Additionally, the trial judge was justified on the evidence in finding that the fire was deliberately set by the appellants, negating their entitlement to indemnity.

Parties
Appellant: Ayoub and Anor; Respondent: Lombard Insurance Co (Aust) Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 December 1992
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Decision on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Arson, Insurance Contracts, Non Disclosure, Duty of Disclosure
Insurance Law Commercial Law Arson Insurance Contracts Non Disclosure Duty of Disclosure

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ayoub and Anor

Appellant

Lombard Insurance Co (Aust) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants deliberately started the fire at the insured premises
  2. 2 Whether non-disclosure of a previous insurer's refusal to insure was material and breached duty of disclosure under the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth)

Ratio Decidendi

The non-disclosure by the appellants of the previous insurer's refusal to insure was a fact relevant to the insurer's decision as contemplated by the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth). This entitled the respondent insurer to reduce its liability to nil. Additionally, the trial judge was justified on the evidence in finding that the fire was deliberately set by the appellants, negating their entitlement to indemnity.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.