Chapter 10 Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Define Subrogation

A

The right of one person, having indemnified another under a legal obligation to do do, to stand in the place of that other and avail himself of all the rights and remedies of that other, whether already enforced or not

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is unjust enrichment?

A

Preventing someone from profiting from a loss and to preserve the principle of indemnity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Nature of Subrogation case example

A

Castellain v Presto 1883

A doctrine in favour of the underwriters or insurers in order to prevent the insured from recovering more than a full indemnity

House fire/house sale example

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Give two examples of insurance that Subrogation doesnt apply to

A

Life insurance

Personal accident

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

The insured is only accountable to the insurers if he has been idemnified for his loss

Case example

A

Scottish union and National insurance v Davies (1970)

Car not repaired example

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Explain express Subrogation

A

Allows insurers to begin proceedings against a TP before they have settled the insured own claim. Giving the insurers the right to control the proceedings

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Recovery greater than the loss example

A

Yorkshire insurance co Ltd v Nisbet Shipping co Ltd 1962

Interest on ship payout

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Source of Subrogation rights, provide the 3 examples

A

Tort

Contract

Statute

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Example of contract in Subrogation rights

A

Property insurers paying claim then look to rights of recovery against a tenant of the insured who is legally responsible for the damage under the terms of the lease

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Statute example in Subrogation rights

A

Riot compensation act 2016

Allows an insurer to sue the relevant authority in their own name

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Subrogation rights example

A

Lister v Romford Ice and Cold Storage Ltd 1957

Father son injury at work

Sons negligence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Court of appeal refusing Subrogation case study example

A

Morris v Ford Motor Co 1973

Public policy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Define Contribution

A

The right of an insurer to call upon others similarly, but not necessarily equally liable to the same insured, to share the cost of an indemnity payment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Conditions which must be satisfied before contribution can arise

A

Each policy is liable for the loss
Each insures the same interest in the subject matter
Two or more policies of indemnity exist
Each insurers the subject matter of the loss
Each insurers the peril which brings about the loss

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Two or more policies of indemnity example

A

Body Corporste 74246 v QBE insurance and Allianz Australia Ins (2017)

Earthquake

50% Contribution request

Seamless view

Contribution not agreed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Common interest case study

A

North British and Mercantile Insurnace Co v London Liverpool and Globe Insurance Co (1877)

Grain

Different interests, Bailee and owner of the grain

17
Q

What’s an escape clause

A

Condition that forbids the insured from taking out another policy with the consent of the insurers

18
Q

Case study regarding No- Contribution payout

A

Gale v Motor Union Insurance Co Ltd 1928

Any driver
Driving other vehicles extension

Both policies excluded liability for losses that were insured elsewhere but the judge ruled that the loss should be shared equally by the two insurers