Malekout v Allied Dunbar Assurance Plc
The Court of Appeal held that TOS was a post-policy medical condition and thus a 'condition' within the meaning of the policy. The clause was ambiguous and should be construed contra proferentem in favour of the insured. The claimant's disablement arose from a condition (TOS) that first came into existence after the policy date, entitling him to the benefit.
- Parties
- Claimant/appellant: Cyrus Malekout; Defendant/respondent: Allied Dunbar Assurance Plc
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 03 February 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Policy Construction, Waiver of Contribution Benefit, Disablement Definition, Contra Proferentem
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Cyrus Malekout
Claimant/appellant
Allied Dunbar Assurance Plc
Defendant/respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimant's disablement arose from a condition which first came into existence after the date the policy was signed as required by the insurance policy definition of disablement.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court of Appeal held that TOS was a post-policy medical condition and thus a 'condition' within the meaning of the policy. The clause was ambiguous and should be construed contra proferentem in favour of the insured. The claimant's disablement arose from a condition (TOS) that first came into existence after the policy date, entitling him to the benefit.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed
Orders
- Declarations that the contributions are treated as duly paid
- Special damages and interest awarded
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment