Brit UW Ltd v F & B Trenchless Solutions Ltd [2015] EWHC 2237 (Comm) (31 July 2015)

Brit UW Ltd v F & B Trenchless Solutions Ltd [2015] EWHC 2237 (Comm) (31 July 2015)

The court found that FBTS failed to disclose material facts (progressive earth settlement and the void at the site) prior to policy inception, which would have influenced a prudent underwriter and did induce Brit to enter the policy. The alleged misrepresentation regarding not working on active railway lines was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 2237 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Brit UW Limited (on behalf of Brit Syndicate 2987 at Lloyd's in relation to policy number B1047FSJ130854); Defendant: F & B Trenchless Solutions Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Commercial Insurance Dispute / High Court Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed; counterclaim dismissed
Legal Topics
Material Non Disclosure, Misrepresentation, Avoidance of Insurance Policy, Inducement, Affirmation, Duty of Utmost Good Faith
Insurance Law Contract Law Material Non Disclosure Misrepresentation Avoidance of Insurance Policy Inducement Affirmation Duty of Utmost Good Faith

Source-derived case record

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brit UW Limited (on behalf of Brit Syndicate 2987 at Lloyd's in relation to policy number B1047FSJ130854)

Claimant

F & B Trenchless Solutions Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Insurance Dispute / High Court Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether FBTS failed to disclose material facts prior to policy inception
  2. 2 Whether FBTS made a material misrepresentation regarding tunnelling on active railway lines
  3. 3 Whether any non-disclosure or misrepresentation induced Brit to enter the policy

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that FBTS failed to disclose material facts (progressive earth settlement and the void at the site) prior to policy inception, which would have influenced a prudent underwriter and did induce Brit to enter the policy. The alleged misrepresentation regarding not working on active railway lines was also material and misleading. Brit did not affirm the policy after acquiring full knowledge of the right to avoid. Accordingly, Brit was entitled to avoid the policy ab initio.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; counterclaim dismissed

Orders

  • Declaration that Brit validly avoided the policy ab initio
  • FBTS's counterclaim for indemnity and damages dismissed