State Assurance Corporation v Labondo (SCA 37 of 1994) [1995] SCCA 21 (10 November 1995)
The respondent is entitled only to the market value of the car at the time of the insurable event, less R1000, and not to the insured value; compensation for loss of use is capped at R5000.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1995] SCCA 21
- Parties
- Appellant: State Assurance Corporation; Respondent: Dawson Labodo
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Seychelles
- Case Number
- SCA 37 of 1994
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- case remitted for assessment of damages
- Legal Topics
- Contract of Insurance, Assessment of Damages, Market Value, Loss of Use
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
State Assurance Corporation
Appellant
Dawson Labodo
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Extent of insurer's liability under contract of insurance
- 2 Basis for assessment of damages for insured vehicle
Ratio Decidendi
The respondent is entitled only to the market value of the car at the time of the insurable event, less R1000, and not to the insured value; compensation for loss of use is capped at R5000.
Court Disposition
case remitted for assessment of damages
Orders
- Respondent entitled to market value of car at time of loss less R1000
- Respondent entitled to not more than R5000 for loss of use
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE SEYCHELLES COURT OF APPEAL STATE ASSURANCE CORPORATION APPELLANT VERSU DAWSON LABODO RESPONDENT Civil Appeal No. 37 of 1994 JUDGMENT I agge with my Learned Brother Ayola that the liability of the Appellant under the terms of the contract of Insurance has been established. It is however clear that the Respondent is only entitled to the market value of the car at the time of the occurence of the insurable event subject to a reduction of R1000 and not to the value insured. On the other hand, the Respondent is entitled to be paid not more than R5000 for loss of use. The case is remitted to the trial court for an assessment of the damages to which the Respondent is entitled. There will be no order as to costs. tAPH a—t— IAA C. T. CA". C-Ein ck cis--U e-Ve- A ) L. E. VENCHARD JUDGE OF APPEAL