Quintano v B W Rose Pty Ltd & ors [2008] NSWSC 793

Quintano v B W Rose Pty Ltd & ors [2008] NSWSC 793

BWR's negligence claim against Prestige had its foundation in International Unity's insolvency because the loss asserted was that BWR was left without indemnity of value; accordingly clause 2.18(a) excluded cover. The claim also asserted a breach of Prestige's duty to advise on the suitability of International Unity, and clause 2.18(b) excluded such claims without requiring objective proof of the breach. The Underwriters were therefore not obliged to indemnify Prestige for the claim or its defence costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 August 2008
Procedural Posture
Third Cross Claim for Indemnity Under a Professional Indemnity Insurance Policy / Judgment on Third Cross Claim Determined Separately
Outcome
Judgment for the cross-defendants, with costs.
Legal Topics
['construction of Exclusion Clause' 'meaning of "arising From"' 'insolvency of Insurer' 'duty to Advise on Suitability of Insurer' 'professional Indemnity Insurance Defence Costs']
['contracts' 'insurance' 'professional Negligence'] ['construction of Exclusion Clause' 'meaning of "arising From"' 'insolvency of Insurer' 'duty to Advise on Suitability of Insurer' 'professional Indemnity Insurance Defence Costs']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Third Cross Claim for Indemnity Under a Professional Indemnity Insurance Policy / Judgment on Third Cross Claim Determined Separately

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether BWR's claim against Prestige arose from the insolvency of International Unity so as to attract exclusion clause 2.18(a)." "Whether BWR's claim against Prestige arose from a breach of Prestige's duty to advise on the suitability of an insurer so as to attract exclusion clause 2.18(b)." 'Whether exclusion clause 2.18(b) required the alleged breach of duty to be objectively established.']

Ratio Decidendi

BWR's negligence claim against Prestige had its foundation in International Unity's insolvency because the loss asserted was that BWR was left without indemnity of value; accordingly clause 2.18(a) excluded cover. The claim also asserted a breach of Prestige's duty to advise on the suitability of International Unity, and clause 2.18(b) excluded such claims without requiring objective proof of the breach. The Underwriters were therefore not obliged to indemnify Prestige for the claim or its defence costs.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the cross-defendants, with costs.

Orders

  • ['On the third cross-claim, judgment for the cross-defendants, with costs.']