Amlin Corporate Member Ltd & Ors v Oriental Assurance Corp [2014] EWCA Civ 1135 (07 August 2014)

Amlin Corporate Member Ltd & Ors v Oriental Assurance Corp [2014] EWCA Civ 1135 (07 August 2014)

The typhoon warranty in the reinsurance policy must be construed according to its plain and unambiguous terms under English law. The existence of a typhoon or storm warning at the port of departure, regardless of local maritime practice or the Circular, triggers the warranty. The vessel's departure from Manila while a storm warning was in effect constituted a breach of the warranty, rendering the policy void. Both the usual and alternate routes were within the possible path of the typhoon, so the breach was established under both limbs of the warranty.

Citation
[2014] EWCA Civ 1135
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Amlin Corporate Member Ltd (on its own behalf and on behalf of all other members of Syndicate 2001 at Lloyd's in relation to policy reference B0738MC000720B); Claimant/respondent: Talbot 2002 Underwriting Capital Ltd (on its own behalf and on behalf of all other members of Syndicate 1183 at Lloyd's in relation to the aforesaid policy); Claimant/respondent: Limit (No.2) Limited (on its own behalf and on behalf of all other members of Syndicate 1036 at Lloyd's in relation to the aforesaid policy); Claimant/respondent: Aegis Electric & Gas International Services Ltd (on its own behalf and on behalf of all other members of Syndicate 1225 at Lloyd's in relation to the aforesaid policy); Claimant/respondent: Noave Corporate Underwriting Ltd (on its own behalf and on behalf of all other members of Syndicate 2007 at Lloyd's in relation to the aforesaid policy); Claimant/respondent: Brit UW Ltd (on its own behalf and on behalf of all other members of Syndicate 2987 at Lloyd's in relation to the aforesaid policy); Defendant/appellant: Oriental Assurance Corporation
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 August 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (commercial Court)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgment for the claimants/respondents upheld.
Legal Topics
Reinsurance, Policy Interpretation, Warranty Breach, Marine Insurance, Construction of Contractual Terms
Insurance Law Maritime Law Contract Law Reinsurance Policy Interpretation Warranty Breach Marine Insurance Construction of Contractual Terms

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Amlin Corporate Member Ltd (on its own behalf and on behalf of all other members of Syndicate 2001 at Lloyd's in relation to policy reference B0738MC000720B)

Claimant/respondent

Talbot 2002 Underwriting Capital Ltd (on its own behalf and on behalf of all other members of Syndicate 1183 at Lloyd's in relation to the aforesaid policy)

Claimant/respondent

Limit (No.2) Limited (on its own behalf and on behalf of all other members of Syndicate 1036 at Lloyd's in relation to the aforesaid policy)

Claimant/respondent

Aegis Electric & Gas International Services Ltd (on its own behalf and on behalf of all other members of Syndicate 1225 at Lloyd's in relation to the aforesaid policy)

Claimant/respondent

Noave Corporate Underwriting Ltd (on its own behalf and on behalf of all other members of Syndicate 2007 at Lloyd's in relation to the aforesaid policy)

Claimant/respondent

Brit UW Ltd (on its own behalf and on behalf of all other members of Syndicate 2987 at Lloyd's in relation to the aforesaid policy)

Claimant/respondent

Oriental Assurance Corporation

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (commercial Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the departure of the vessel constituted a breach of the typhoon warranty in the reinsurance policy
  2. 2 Proper construction of the typhoon warranty clause under English law
  3. 3 Whether the typhoon warranty should be construed by reference to Philippine maritime practice or the Circular

Ratio Decidendi

The typhoon warranty in the reinsurance policy must be construed according to its plain and unambiguous terms under English law. The existence of a typhoon or storm warning at the port of departure, regardless of local maritime practice or the Circular, triggers the warranty. The vessel's departure from Manila while a storm warning was in effect constituted a breach of the warranty, rendering the policy void. Both the usual and alternate routes were within the possible path of the typhoon, so the breach was established under both limbs of the warranty.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgment for the claimants/respondents upheld.

Orders

  • Declaration that reinsurers are not liable to indemnify Oriental under the reinsurance policy due to breach of typhoon warranty.
  • Reinsurance policy declared void in respect of the relevant loss.