Shuetrim v FSS Trustee Corporation [2015] NSWSC 795

Shuetrim v FSS Trustee Corporation [2015] NSWSC 795

Interest pursuant to s 57 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) should run from 17 December 2014, being the date from which it was unreasonable for the second and third defendants to withhold payment. The plaintiff succeeded on the main issues but failed on the constructive denial issue, which justifies an order that the second and third defendants pay 80 per cent of the plaintiff's costs. The Trustees are not entitled to costs from the insurers or in respect of subpoenas.

Parties
Plaintiff: Benjamin Shuetrim; First Defendant: FSS Trustee Corporation; Second Defendant: MetLife Insurance Ltd; Third Defendant: TAL Life Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Equity Insurance / Post Trial: Reasons on Interest and Costs
Outcome
Interest runs under s 57 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) from 17 December 2014; plaintiff declared entitled to TPD benefits; orders for payment of sums and interest; insurers (second and third defendants) to pay 80% of plaintiff's costs; no order as to first defendant's costs.
Legal Topics
Interest Under Insurance Contracts Act, Costs Orders, Total and Permanent Disablement Benefit
Insurance Equity Interest Under Insurance Contracts Act Costs Orders Total and Permanent Disablement Benefit

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benjamin Shuetrim

Plaintiff

FSS Trustee Corporation

First Defendant

MetLife Insurance Ltd

Second Defendant

TAL Life Ltd

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Equity Insurance / Post Trial: Reasons on Interest and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 From what date should interest under s 57 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) run against insurers?
  2. 2 Should costs be apportioned due to partial success on major issues?
  3. 3 Should the Trustee recover costs from the insurers?

Ratio Decidendi

Interest pursuant to s 57 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) should run from 17 December 2014, being the date from which it was unreasonable for the second and third defendants to withhold payment. The plaintiff succeeded on the main issues but failed on the constructive denial issue, which justifies an order that the second and third defendants pay 80 per cent of the plaintiff's costs. The Trustees are not entitled to costs from the insurers or in respect of subpoenas.

Court Disposition

Interest runs under s 57 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) from 17 December 2014; plaintiff declared entitled to TPD benefits; orders for payment of sums and interest; insurers (second and third defendants) to pay 80% of plaintiff's costs; no order as to first defendant's costs.

Orders

  • Declare the purported determination of the second defendant (MetLife) under policy 3261 is void and of no effect.
  • Declare the plaintiff satisfies the definition of Total and Permanent Disablement under the second defendant's policy number 3261 (Police – Blue Ribbon Policy).