Provident Savings Life Assurance Society of New York v. Bellew

Provident Savings Life Assurance Society of New York v. Bellew

Majority held the extra annual premium was supported by consideration because the insurer assumed the ongoing risk that war might continue and agreed to continue the war risk coverage year to year while premiums were paid; consequently the extra premiums were not recoverable, and the indorsement consenting to service in South Africa operated to waive the torrid‑zone travel restriction insofar as necessary for that consent to be effective.

Citation
(1904) 35 SCR 35
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Provident Savings Life Assurance Society of New York; Respondent/plaintiff: Henry Cosgrove Bellew
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 May 1904
Procedural Posture
Appeal (life Insurance) / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King's Bench, Province of Quebec
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs; judgment for plaintiff set aside and action dismissed
Legal Topics
War Risk, Extra Premium, Consideration, Policy Interpretation, Waiver, Torrid Zone Restriction
Source Language
English
Insurance Contract Law War Risk Extra Premium Consideration Policy Interpretation Waiver Torrid Zone Restriction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Provident Savings Life Assurance Society of New York

Appellant/defendant

Henry Cosgrove Bellew

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Appeal (life Insurance) / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From Court of King's Bench, Province of Quebec

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extra premiums paid for war risk could be recovered where insureds reached theatre after cessation of hostilities
  2. 2 Whether payment of extra premium was supported by consideration or the risk ever attached
  3. 3 Whether indorsement consenting to military service waived the torrid zone travel restriction

Ratio Decidendi

Majority held the extra annual premium was supported by consideration because the insurer assumed the ongoing risk that war might continue and agreed to continue the war risk coverage year to year while premiums were paid; consequently the extra premiums were not recoverable, and the indorsement consenting to service in South Africa operated to waive the torrid‑zone travel restriction insofar as necessary for that consent to be effective.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs; judgment for plaintiff set aside and action dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs here and in all courts
  • Judgment of Court of King's Bench and Superior Court set aside; action dismissed