Peter Malcolm Brotherton & Ors v. Aseguradora Colseguros SA & Anon

[2003] EWCA Civ 705
Ward LJ, Buxton LJ, Mance LJ
Court of Appeal
May 2003

 

The materiality of a particular circumstance has to be judged when the risk is accepted and by reference to the impact it would have on the mind of a prudent insurer; certainty is always an important requirement in any insurance contract. Allegations of dishonesty must be disclosed whether or not they are proven.

The reinsured, Aseguros, failed to disclose serious allegations of criminality that had been made against the insured bank's president. The reinsurers, Brotherton, sought to avoid the policy for breach of duty of good faith.

It was held that the materiality of a particular circumstance had to be judged when the risk was accepted and by reference to the impact it would have on the mind of a prudent insurer.

It was not a defence to show that the allegations were subsequently proved to be unfounded and those paragraphs of Aseguros's statement of case dealing with such issues were struck out. It was held that an underwriter complaining of non-disclosure should not have to await the outcome of a trial to determine the extent of risk. Such a determination would represent a complete departure from the important requirement of certainty in insurance dealings. The time for consideration of all the circumstances was when the risk was accepted.

This Court of Appeal decision has now effectively overruled the decision made last year in The Grecia Express (2002). In that case Colman J confirmed that allegations were capable of being material circumstances, even if it could later be shown that they were untrue. Unusually, however, he also held that if evidence at trial proved the allegations were untrue, the court should regard maintaining an avoidance as a breach of the underwriter's reciprocal duty of good faith to the assured and therefore debar underwriters from enforcing their avoidance. The Brotherton Court of Appeal decision was also in accordance with another case that was heard just before, in February 2003, Drake Insurance v. Provident Insurance (2003). This case also successfully challenged The Grecia Express doctrine.