Business Law Assignment
Table of Statutes Page
Gambling Act 2005 4,6,7
Gaming Act 1845 4
Life Assurance Act 1774 5,6
Marine Insurance Act 1788 4,5
Marine Insurance Act 1906 4
Marine Insurance (Gambling Policies) Act 1909 6
Table of Cases
Cowan V Jeffrey Associates 1998 SCLR 619 4
Feasey V Sun Life Assurance Co of Canada 2003 EWCA Civ 885 5
Griffiths V Flemming 1909 1KB 805 4
Inglis V Stock 1885 10 Apps Cas 263 5
MacAura V Northern Assurance Co Ltd 1925 AC 619 HL 5
Mitchell v Scottish Eagle Insurance Co Limited 1997 S.L.T. 793 4
Prudential Insurance V IRC 1904 2 KB 658 5
Scottish Amicable Heritable Securities V Northern Assurance Co 1883 11 R 287 5
Sloans Dairies V Glasgow Corp 1977 Scot CS CSIH_2 4
Wight V Brown 1845 11D 459 4
The concept of insurable interest and the alleged need under Scots law for the requirement of insurable interest by the insured in an insurance policy, have recently come under scrutiny. Why is this, and what should be done about the problems arising from the requirement for insurable interest? How realistic are the proposals for reform?
The question makes reference to issues with the concept of insurable interest, how we managed to get to this point, lessons to be learned, any solutions to the issues, although nothing seems new that there are issues with the concept of insurable interest, the definition Mitchell v Scottish Eagle Insurance Co Limited[1], and the call to resolve the various problems arising, discussed in the 2008 issues paper. A previous Joint Scoping Paper[2] issued in 2006 by the Law Commission (LC) and the Scottish Law Commission (SLC) was a return to the area of Insurance Contract Law, in response to a report from the BILA[3] in 2002. The Scoping Paper predates the Gambling Act[4], but at the outset, highlights issues and prospect of reform on various components of Insurance Contracts, including insurable interest. In Scots Law, insurable
Gambling Act 2005 4,6,7
Gaming Act 1845 4
Life Assurance Act 1774 5,6
Marine Insurance Act 1788 4,5
Marine Insurance Act 1906 4
Marine Insurance (Gambling Policies) Act 1909 6
Table of Cases
Cowan V Jeffrey Associates 1998 SCLR 619 4
Feasey V Sun Life Assurance Co of Canada 2003 EWCA Civ 885 5
Griffiths V Flemming 1909 1KB 805 4
Inglis V Stock 1885 10 Apps Cas 263 5
MacAura V Northern Assurance Co Ltd 1925 AC 619 HL 5
Mitchell v Scottish Eagle Insurance Co Limited 1997 S.L.T. 793 4
Prudential Insurance V IRC 1904 2 KB 658 5
Scottish Amicable Heritable Securities V Northern Assurance Co 1883 11 R 287 5
Sloans Dairies V Glasgow Corp 1977 Scot CS CSIH_2 4
Wight V Brown 1845 11D 459 4
The concept of insurable interest and the alleged need under Scots law for the requirement of insurable interest by the insured in an insurance policy, have recently come under scrutiny. Why is this, and what should be done about the problems arising from the requirement for insurable interest? How realistic are the proposals for reform?
The question makes reference to issues with the concept of insurable interest, how we managed to get to this point, lessons to be learned, any solutions to the issues, although nothing seems new that there are issues with the concept of insurable interest, the definition Mitchell v Scottish Eagle Insurance Co Limited[1], and the call to resolve the various problems arising, discussed in the 2008 issues paper. A previous Joint Scoping Paper[2] issued in 2006 by the Law Commission (LC) and the Scottish Law Commission (SLC) was a return to the area of Insurance Contract Law, in response to a report from the BILA[3] in 2002. The Scoping Paper predates the Gambling Act[4], but at the outset, highlights issues and prospect of reform on various components of Insurance Contracts, including insurable interest. In Scots Law, insurable
Bibliography: C Ashton, Fundamentals of Scots Law, Thomson & Green (2003) Christina Ashton, Understanding Scots Law, Thomson and Green ( 2007)