Feasey v Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada and Another; Steamship Mutual Underwriting Association (Bermuda) Ltd v Feasey
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 17 May 2002 |
| Neutral Citation | [2002] EWHC 868 (Comm) |
| Date | 17 May 2002 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Commercial Court) |
Queen's Bench Division
Before Mr Justice Langley.
Insurance - multiple contracts for same interest does not preclude claim for recovery for personal injury or death of persons on board a vessel whether insurable interests were insured in a manner to be characterised as a gaming or wagering contract - Life Assurance Act 1774 Section 1 & Section 3 - Dalby v India & London Life Assurance Co (1854) 15 CB 634 - Hebdon v West (1863) 3 B&S 579
The existence of multiple contracts of insurance for the same interest did not preclude a claim for recovery under an accident and illness policy in respect of personal injury or death of persons on board a vessel.
Mr Justice Langley so held in the Queen's Bench Division in a reserved judgment (i) granting a declaration that the personal accident and illness master lineslip policy between Steamship Mutual Underwriting Association (Bermuda) Ltd and Anthony Feasey, a representative Lloyd's underwriter suing on his own behalf and on behalf of all the members of Syndicate 957, was valid and (ii) awarding the unpaid sums due to Steamship from Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada and Phoenix Home Life Mutual Insurance Company under reinsurance contracts protecting Syndicate 957 in respect of the liabilities under the lineslip policy.
Mr Julian Flaux, QC, Mr David Lord and Miss Caroline Laband for Mr Feasey; Mr Dominic Kendrick, QC and Mr Simon Kerr for Sun Life; Mr Dominic Kendrik, QC, Mr Simon Kerr and Mr Adam Fenton for Phoenix; Mr Anthony Boswood, QC and Mr Richard Handyside for Steamship.
MR JUSTICE LANGLEY said that Steamship was a protection and indemnity club which provided cover to its members for their liabilities for personal injury or death of persons occurring on or in relation to vessels entered with Steamship.
Steamship entered in to the lineslip policy with Syndicate 957 to insure against any liability of a member to third parties. Syndicate 957 entered in to reinsurance contracts with Sun Life and Phoenix in respect of its liabilities to Steamship.
Sun Life and Phoenix ceased to pay claims made by Syndicate 957 and it refused to pay amounts due under the lineslip policy alleging, inter alia, that Steamship had no insurable interest to protect by the lineslip policy, thereby were in breach of section 1 of the Life Assurance Act 1774, and if it did, it should...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Feasey v Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada and Another; Steamship Mutual Underwriting Association (Bermuda) Ltd v Feasey
...Lord Justice Waller 1 This is an appeal from the judgment of Langley J given on 17 May 2002. That judgment is now reported at [2002] EWHC 868 (Comm). Only certain points are live on the appeal. By his judgment Langley J decided that Steamship Mutual Underwriting Association (Bermuda) Limite......
-
Feasey v Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada
...meant that other was committed for whole risk-Life Assurance Act 1774, s. 1, 3. This was an appeal from the judgment of Langley J ([2002] EWHC 868 (Comm); [2003] 2 CLC 936) deciding that Steamship Mutual Underwriting Association (Bermuda) Ltd (“Steamship”) had an insurable interest in relat......
-
Sphere Drake Insurance Ltd v Euro International Underwriting Ltd and Others
...be subject to a court award or negotiated settlement." This change was referred to in Feasey v Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada [2002] EWHC 868 (Comm) where Langley J pointed out that the advantage of classification as PA meant that the business did not require the provision of substant......
-
Martek Biosciences Corp v Cargill International Trading Pte Ltd
...UK trade marks appeal proceedings (see Etat Francaise Representee par la Ministere de L’Agriculture de la Foret v Bernard Matthews plc [2002] EWHC 868). Singapore Authorities on Civil The Respondent further submitted that Singapore cases on civil jurisprudence supported its position that La......