Dotlic v Hannover Life Re of Australasia Limited [2017] NSWSC 986

Dotlic v Hannover Life Re of Australasia Limited [2017] NSWSC 986

The insurer acted reasonably and comprehensively in forming its opinion, based on medical and vocational assessments, that the plaintiff was not totally and permanently disabled within the meaning of the policy; there was no obligation to undertake a labour market analysis, and the insurer is not required to act as an employment agency.

Parties
Plaintiff: Rajko Dotlic; First Defendant: Hannover Life Re of Australasia Limited; Second Defendant: United Super Pty Limited as Trustee for the Construction and Building Unions Superannuation
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Claim Pursuant to Disability Policy / Final Judgment; Orders
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Disability Policy, Insurer's Opinion, Labour Market Analysis, Total and Permanent Disability
Insurance Law Equity Disability Policy Insurer's Opinion Labour Market Analysis Total and Permanent Disability

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rajko Dotlic

Plaintiff

Hannover Life Re of Australasia Limited

First Defendant

United Super Pty Limited as Trustee for the Construction and Building Unions Superannuation

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Claim Pursuant to Disability Policy / Final Judgment; Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the insurer's opinion that the plaintiff was not totally and permanently disabled was unreasonable
  2. 2 Whether insurer was required to obtain a labour market analysis before forming its opinion

Ratio Decidendi

The insurer acted reasonably and comprehensively in forming its opinion, based on medical and vocational assessments, that the plaintiff was not totally and permanently disabled within the meaning of the policy; there was no obligation to undertake a labour market analysis, and the insurer is not required to act as an employment agency.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • The separate question is answered in favour of the defendants.
  • The proceedings are dismissed.