Case Law Perils Flashcards
1
Q
Explain Oddy v Phoenix Assurance (1966) case
A
- Relates to storm peril
- Judge held that “storm means storm and to me connotes some sort of violent wind usually accompanied by rain or hail or snow”.
- Must involve violent wind
2
Q
Explain S&M Hotels v Legal & General Assurance Society (1972) case
A
- Relates to storm peril
- Thesiger J - “ storm must be something longer and widespread than a gust of wind.
3
Q
Explain the R v Ghosh (1982) case
A
-Relates to theft
- Test of what is considered to be dishonest appropriation was explored. Test to be applied is:
- Whether they acted dishonestly by standard of ordinary & honest people
- Whether they realised that what they were doing was by standards dishonest
4
Q
Explain Rohan Investments Ltd v Cunningham (1998) case
A
- Relates to Flood peril
- PH flat damaged by ingress of water from heavy rainfall over period of days
- Case = flood does not have to be violent rush of water occurring in short space of time, can be due to abnormal volume of rainfall
5
Q
Explain Young v Sun Alliance & London Insurance Ltd (1976) case
A
- Relates to Flood peril
- Defines what flood means - Court of appeal held that word “flood” means a rush of water brought about by severe weather conditions
6
Q
Explain Aegis Electrical & Gas International Services Company Ltd v Continental Casualty Company (2007) case
A
- Relates to explosion peril
- Court held that what was required for an explosion was “manifest violence & a shattering destruction.”
7
Q
Explain Commonwealth Smelting Ltd v Guardian Royal Exchange Assurance (1984) case
A
- Relates to explosion peril
- Case held that an explosion was an event which was “violent, noisy & caused by rapid chemical or nuclear reaction or the bursting out of gas or vapour under pressure.”
8
Q
Explain Harris v Poland 1941 case
A
- Relates to fire peril
- Jewellery placed under fire grate & forgotten about
- Judge ruled that this can be considered under fire policy as jewellery not supposed to be on fire.
