Blog

, ,

Which insurance policy appeal

In QBE Insurance (International) Ltd v Allianz Australia Insurance Ltd [2018] NZCA 239 the Court of Appeal upheld the High Court decision that Allianz was not liable for earthquake damage because its insurance policy did not commence until 4pm on 4 September 2010 in relation to the earthquake that occurred at 4.35am.  The QBE policy ended at 4pm on 4 September 2010 so it was solely liable.  The agreement between the insured’s broker and Allianz on placement was that the Allianz policy would incept on the expiry of the QBE policy.  Any later documents could not affect that agreement.

, ,

Southern Response Earthquake Limitation Statement

Here is Southern Response’s  28 June 2018 statement about enforcement of limitation defence(s) after 4 September 2018.  Southern Response had previously said that it would not enforce a limitation defence before 4 September 2018.  In its statement it says that after 4 September 2018 its position is that the limitation period runs from the date that Southern Response settles, declines, or advises in writing a decision on the claim.  This is similar to the EQC and Tower position.

, , ,

IAG failed earthquake insurance repairs

In Robin v IAG & ors [2018] NZHC 1464 the High Court (Gendall J) reversed the decision of Matthews AJ in Robin v IAG & ors [2018] NZHC 204 about joining as defendants people involved in post earthquake repair work.  Ms Robin owned 214 Fitzgerald Avenue.  She sued IAG alleging that the earthquake repair work done did not restore the house to the policy standard.  She also sued the manager of the repair work, Canterbury Reconstruction Ltd.  IAG joined Hawkins who monitored/assessed the remedial work as a third party.  IAG then asked the Court to join as defendants Houselifters Ltd, Max Contracts Ltd and the Christchurch City Council.  Ms Robin […]

, ,

Vero loses waiver summary judgment

In Gabriel & ors v EQC & Vero [2018] 1255 the High Court dismissed an application by Vero for summary judgment against the current owner of an earthquake damaged house based on an argument that the original insured had waived the claim against Vero.  The original insured owner had apparently agreed with Vero in 2013 to close the claim, however, the evidence was uncertain about whether the claim referred to was only the “out of EQC scope claim” or the entire house claim.   So the Court refused to enter summary judgment and the claim continues against Vero by the current owner assignee.  

, ,

Southern Response- Misleading Conduct

Southern Response (formerly AMI Insurance) had a practice of maintaining duplicate remedial costings for earthquake damaged houses.  A “customer” version and an “office” version.  The “customer” version did not include demolition, professional fees and contingency.  The “office” version included these costings.  Southern Response concealed the “office” version with the effect that many people settled their insurance claim for less than their entitlement.  Rick and Anna Groen sued Southern Response in the High Court claiming breaches of the Fair Trading Act and duty of good faith.  The High Court in Groen v Southern Response [2018] NZHC 1025 recently considered the status of the legal advice Southern Response received in the context […]