Cuff v Commodore Marine Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 1673 (31 October 2001)

Cuff v Commodore Marine Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 1673 (31 October 2001)

The failure to disclose the prior professional valuation was not material non-disclosure as the discrepancy was explainable and would not have altered the insurer's decision or terms; the insured's valuation was honestly held and not a misrepresentation; the proximate cause of the loss was grounding and/or impact damage, both perils of the sea, not inherent vice or wear and tear.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 1673
Parties
Claimant/respondent: David Michael Cuff; Defendant/appellant: Commodore Marine Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 October 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Material Non Disclosure, Misrepresentation, Marine Insurance, Perils of the Sea, Causation, Valued Policy, Seaworthiness
Insurance Law Maritime Law Material Non Disclosure Misrepresentation Marine Insurance Perils of the Sea Causation Valued Policy +1 more

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 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Michael Cuff

Claimant/respondent

Commodore Marine Limited

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether non-disclosure of a prior professional valuation constituted material non-disclosure under section 18 of the Marine Insurance Act 1906
  2. 2 Whether the insured's statement of value was a misrepresentation under section 20 of the Marine Insurance Act 1906
  3. 3 Whether the loss was proximately caused by a peril of the sea or by inherent vice/wear and tear

Ratio Decidendi

The failure to disclose the prior professional valuation was not material non-disclosure as the discrepancy was explainable and would not have altered the insurer's decision or terms; the insured's valuation was honestly held and not a misrepresentation; the proximate cause of the loss was grounding and/or impact damage, both perils of the sea, not inherent vice or wear and tear.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Respondent to have his costs, subject to detailed assessment
  • Order for assessment of respondent's costs of appeal for public funding purposes