Widefree Ltd (t/a Abrahams & Ballard) v Brit Insurance Ltd

Widefree Ltd (t/a Abrahams & Ballard) v Brit Insurance Ltd

The court found, on the balance of probabilities, that the ring was stolen on 9th October 2008 by Ms Nourri and her accomplice. The unexplained loss exclusion does not apply as the date and circumstances of the loss are proved. The insured complied with the general condition precedent by retaining and providing the relevant CCTV footage as advised by police; the insurers did not request all footage in time and cannot rely on the insured's failure to retain it. Judgment for the claimant for £120,940.

Parties
Claimant: Widefree Limited (trading as Abrahams & Ballard); Defendant: Brit Insurance Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the claimant
Legal Topics
Jewellers' Block Insurance, Policy Exclusions, Condition Precedent, Evidence, Burden of Proof
Insurance Law Contract Law Jewellers' Block Insurance Policy Exclusions Condition Precedent Evidence Burden of Proof

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Widefree Limited (trading as Abrahams & Ballard)

Claimant

Brit Insurance Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the unexplained loss exclusion applies to the theft of the ring
  2. 2 Whether the insured breached the general condition precedent by failing to retain all CCTV footage
  3. 3 Whether the insured proved the date and circumstances of the loss

Ratio Decidendi

The court found, on the balance of probabilities, that the ring was stolen on 9th October 2008 by Ms Nourri and her accomplice. The unexplained loss exclusion does not apply as the date and circumstances of the loss are proved. The insured complied with the general condition precedent by retaining and providing the relevant CCTV footage as advised by police; the insurers did not request all footage in time and cannot rely on the insured's failure to retain it. Judgment for the claimant for £120,940.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimant

Orders

  • Brit Insurance Limited to pay Widefree Limited £120,940