Lehmbecker's Earthmoving and Excavators (Pty) Ltd. v Incorporate General Insurances Ltd. (397/82) [1984] ZASCA 47; [1984] 2 All SA 352 (A) ; 1984 (3) SA 513 (A) (10 May 1984)

Lehmbecker's Earthmoving and Excavators (Pty) Ltd. v Incorporate General Insurances Ltd. (397/82) [1984] ZASCA 47; [1984] 2 All SA 352 (A) ; 1984 (3) SA 513 (A) (10 May 1984)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the forfeiture clause in the insurance policy, while broadly worded, does not operate to deprive the insured of valid claims that accrued prior to the submission of a fraudulent claim. The Court reasoned that such clauses, unless expressed in clear and unambiguous terms, do not divest the insured of rights already vested before the breach. The intention of the parties, as gathered from the contract as a whole and supported by legal authority, was not to penalize honest claims made before any fraudulent conduct. The Court found that claim 'B' had accrued before claim 'C' was fraudulently submitted, and the insurer's repudiation of claim 'B' was not...

Citation
[1984] ZASCA 47
Parties
Appellant: Lehmbecker's Earthmoving and Excavators (Pty) Limited; Respondent: Incorporated General Insurances Limited
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 May 1984
Case Number
397/82
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Transvaal Provincial Division
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Judgment for the plaintiff in the amount claimed, with interest and costs.
Judges
Rabie, Kotzé, Miller, Howard, Grosskopf
Legal Topics
Insurance Policy Interpretation, Fraudulent Claims, Contractual Forfeiture Clauses
Commercial and Corporate Insurance Policy Interpretation Fraudulent Claims Contractual Forfeiture Clauses

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lehmbecker's Earthmoving and Excavators (Pty) Limited

Appellant

Incorporated General Insurances Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Transvaal Provincial Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does a fraudulent claim under an insurance policy result in forfeiture of all benefits, including valid claims accrued prior to the fraud?
  2. 2 Is the insurer entitled to repudiate a valid claim submitted before a subsequent fraudulent claim under the same policy?

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the forfeiture clause in the insurance policy, while broadly worded, does not operate to deprive the insured of valid claims that accrued prior to the submission of a fraudulent claim. The Court reasoned that such clauses, unless expressed in clear and unambiguous terms, do not divest the insured of rights already vested before the breach. The intention of the parties, as gathered from the contract as a whole and supported by legal authority, was not to penalize honest claims made before any fraudulent conduct. The Court found that claim 'B' had accrued before claim 'C' was fraudulently submitted, and the insurer's repudiation of claim 'B' was not...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Judgment for the plaintiff in the amount claimed, with interest and costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed with costs.
  • The order of the court a quo is set aside and substituted with judgment for the plaintiff in the amount claimed.