Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 05 JULY 2012

Interpretation Of Warranties

Under English law, the legal effect of breach of warranty is draconian, entitling the insurer to treat himself as discharged from all liability under the policy, irrespective of causation.

United KingdomInsurance
Anthony Menzies
Anthony Menzies
James Crabtree
James Crabtree

Elafonissos Fishing & Shipping v Aigaion Insurance Co SA (the "AGIOS SPYRIDON") [2012]1
Commercial Court, 31 May 2012

Under English law, the legal effect of breach of warranty is draconian, entitling the insurer to treat himself as discharged from all liability under the policy, irrespective of causation. For this reason, warranties are interpreted strictly, a position vividly illustrated by the decision of the Court of Appeal in Hussain v Brown [1995].

In that case, involving a property policy, the assured had been asked in the proposal form "are any premises fitted with any system of intruder alarm?". The assured gave the answer "yes", which was true at the time. However, it had ceased to be case by the time the premises were damaged by a fire some five months later, in that there was no longer an operable intruder alarm system in place. Insurers failed in their argument that the warranty imposed an ongoing obligation to maintain the warranted system. If

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from