Korea National Insurance Corporation v Allianz Global Corporate & Speciality AG [2007] EWCA Civ 1066 (30 October 2007)

Korea National Insurance Corporation v Allianz Global Corporate & Speciality AG [2007] EWCA Civ 1066 (30 October 2007)

The Court held that Allianz had no real prospect of establishing at trial that a binding compromise agreement was reached at the 23 December 2005 meeting, or that KNIC acted fraudulently in obtaining the Korean judgment. The absence of any written record, the content and tone of subsequent correspondence, and the lack of evidence from key witnesses all pointed against the existence of a binding settlement. Accordingly, summary judgment for KNIC and the striking out of the relevant defence and counterclaim were upheld.

Citation
[2007] EWCA Civ 1066
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Korea National Insurance Corporation; Defendant/appellant: Allianz Global Corporate & Speciality AG
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Appeal From Summary Judgment and Strike Out Order (cpr Part 24)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Reinsurance, Summary Judgment, Fraud Allegations, Contract Formation, Enforcement of Foreign Judgments
Insurance Law Civil Procedure Reinsurance Summary Judgment Fraud Allegations Contract Formation Enforcement of Foreign Judgments

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Korea National Insurance Corporation

Claimant/respondent

Allianz Global Corporate & Speciality AG

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Appeal From Summary Judgment and Strike Out Order (cpr Part 24)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a binding compromise agreement was reached between KNIC and Allianz discharging the reinsurance liability
  2. 2 Whether the Korean judgment was obtained by fraud due to alleged non-disclosure of the compromise agreement

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that Allianz had no real prospect of establishing at trial that a binding compromise agreement was reached at the 23 December 2005 meeting, or that KNIC acted fraudulently in obtaining the Korean judgment. The absence of any written record, the content and tone of subsequent correspondence, and the lack of evidence from key witnesses all pointed against the existence of a binding settlement. Accordingly, summary judgment for KNIC and the striking out of the relevant defence and counterclaim were upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Summary judgment for KNIC upheld
  • Relevant parts of Allianz's defence and counterclaim struck out