Uberrimae Fidei Case Study
3.1 Evolution of the concept Uberrimae Fidei
The duty of good utmost faith initially arose to explain why the insured was required to disclose to the insurer all information relevant to the risk insured. This duty, however, was also placed on the insurer, so that there was a mutual obligation of disclosure prior to entering into the contract.
The acknowledge origin of the concept of utmost good faith in common law is considered by both the courts and legal writers to be found in the judgment of Lord Mansfield in the case of Carter v. Boehm . It was stated by lord Mansfield:
“Insurance is a contract upon speculation. The special facts, upon which the contingent chance is to be computed, lie most commonly in the knowledge of the insured once …show more content…
Lord Mansfield was in this regad well versed in civil law and in fact frequently referred in his judgments to works on marine insurance by European authors, in Carter v. Boehm , he applied the general principles of good faith to an insurance contract. Accordingly, nor the word “utmost” in describing good faith , nor the latin equivalent “uberrima fides” are to be found in Lord Mansfield’s speech
When Sir Mc.Kenzi Chalmers drafted the codified English law on Marine Insurance in the Marine Insurance Act, 1906(UK), it provided in Section 17 beneath the heading “Insurance is Uberrimae Fidei”- “A contract of marine insurance is a contract based upon the utmost good faith and, if the utmost good faith be not observed by either party, the contract may be avoided by the other party”. Most common law jurisdiction have modeled their marine insurance law closely upon the United Kingdom legislation and most have retained in their legislation a provision equivalent to Section 17 …show more content…
Desborough , the case is related to the insurance of the Duke of Saxe Gotha with the insurer’s agent in Germany and the action was brought to recover the money payable on the policy after the Duke’s death.
Bayle J. stated “in all cases if insurance, whether on ships, houses, or lives, the underwriter should be informed of every material circumstance within the knowledge of the assured; and the proper question is , whether any particular circumstance was in fact material and not whether the party believed it to be so. The contrary doctrine would lead to frequent supression of information, and it would often be extremely difficult to show that the party neglecting to give the information though it
The duty of good utmost faith initially arose to explain why the insured was required to disclose to the insurer all information relevant to the risk insured. This duty, however, was also placed on the insurer, so that there was a mutual obligation of disclosure prior to entering into the contract.
The acknowledge origin of the concept of utmost good faith in common law is considered by both the courts and legal writers to be found in the judgment of Lord Mansfield in the case of Carter v. Boehm . It was stated by lord Mansfield:
“Insurance is a contract upon speculation. The special facts, upon which the contingent chance is to be computed, lie most commonly in the knowledge of the insured once …show more content…
Lord Mansfield was in this regad well versed in civil law and in fact frequently referred in his judgments to works on marine insurance by European authors, in Carter v. Boehm , he applied the general principles of good faith to an insurance contract. Accordingly, nor the word “utmost” in describing good faith , nor the latin equivalent “uberrima fides” are to be found in Lord Mansfield’s speech
When Sir Mc.Kenzi Chalmers drafted the codified English law on Marine Insurance in the Marine Insurance Act, 1906(UK), it provided in Section 17 beneath the heading “Insurance is Uberrimae Fidei”- “A contract of marine insurance is a contract based upon the utmost good faith and, if the utmost good faith be not observed by either party, the contract may be avoided by the other party”. Most common law jurisdiction have modeled their marine insurance law closely upon the United Kingdom legislation and most have retained in their legislation a provision equivalent to Section 17 …show more content…
Desborough , the case is related to the insurance of the Duke of Saxe Gotha with the insurer’s agent in Germany and the action was brought to recover the money payable on the policy after the Duke’s death.
Bayle J. stated “in all cases if insurance, whether on ships, houses, or lives, the underwriter should be informed of every material circumstance within the knowledge of the assured; and the proper question is , whether any particular circumstance was in fact material and not whether the party believed it to be so. The contrary doctrine would lead to frequent supression of information, and it would often be extremely difficult to show that the party neglecting to give the information though it