C. Davidson & Sons, Ltd v. The Star Fire and Burglary Insurance Co., Ltd [1902] ScotLR 40_26 (21 October 1902)

C. Davidson & Sons, Ltd v. The Star Fire and Burglary Insurance Co., Ltd [1902] ScotLR 40_26 (21 October 1902)

There was no consensus in idem because the defenders were not informed that insurance required membership in the company, and they never agreed to such a condition. The defenders were entitled to refuse the policy and are not liable for the premium.

Citation
[1902] ScotLR 40_26
Parties
Defender/appellant: C. Davidson & Sons, Limited; Pursuer/respondent: The Star Fire and Burglary Insurance Company, Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
21 October 1902
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session Inner House Second Division
Outcome
appeal allowed; interlocutors recalled; defenders assoilzied (absolved)
Legal Topics
Fire Insurance, Mutual Insurance Company, Consensus in Idem, Contract Formation, Policy Conditions
Contract Law Insurance Law Fire Insurance Mutual Insurance Company Consensus in Idem Contract Formation Policy Conditions

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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C. Davidson & Sons, Limited

Defender/appellant

The Star Fire and Burglary Insurance Company, Limited

Pursuer/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session Inner House Second Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an insurance policy imposing membership in a mutual company, not disclosed in negotiations, binds the insured to accept the policy and pay the premium
  2. 2 Whether there was consensus in idem (agreement on the same thing) between the parties

Ratio Decidendi

There was no consensus in idem because the defenders were not informed that insurance required membership in the company, and they never agreed to such a condition. The defenders were entitled to refuse the policy and are not liable for the premium.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; interlocutors recalled; defenders assoilzied (absolved)

Orders

  • Interlocutors of the Sheriffs recalled
  • Defenders assoilzied from the pursuers' claim