5 Dec 2017
DOIG v TOWER INSURANCE LIMITED [2017] NZHC 2997
- Citation
- [2017] NZHC 2997
- Court
- High Court
The plaintiffs' estoppel claim fails because (1) existing authority (Bryant) restricts assignment of replacement rights and Tower's communications were capable of being read consistently with that law, (2) the plaintiffs did not prove actionable detrimental reliance (mere unfulfilled expectation is insufficient), and (3) Tower's liability only crystallised after EQC determined the claim was over cap and Tower paid within a reasonable period; declaratory relief and interest claims dismissed.