Do you even lift?26 July 2021 | Insurance & Health Law
The New South Wales Court of Appeal has upheld an earlier finding of negligence against a gym operator for failing to enforce its own rules requiring members to put weights away after use and, alternatively, failing to ensure staff put the weights away.
NSW Court of Appeal rules: “bare possibilities” are not enough to constitute notification of circumstances within the meaning of s40(3) of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth)26 July 2021 | Insurance & Health Law
The NSW Court of Appeal has clarified that a notification must contain sufficient information to enable an insurer to objectively assess the likelihood or possibility of a claim. To engage section 40(3) of the Insurance Contracts Act (1984) (Cth) (ICA) it will be sufficient that the notified facts...
The Opal Tower - installed, erected, supplied…but not a "Product"22 July 2021 | Insurance & Health Law
The Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia was asked to determine a rather unique dispute as to whether the Opal Tower was a “Product” for the purposes of a policy of insurance. Having regard to the context of the policy as a whole, the Court said no.
Applicants and allocation clauses – an indemnity dispute regarding defence costs6 July 2021 | Insurance & Health Law
The Court ordered AIG Australia Limited to fully indemnify two policyholders for defence costs incurred in underlying Supreme Court proceedings pursuant to a management liability policy, despite its reliance on a narrow definition of “manager”. The Court applied a businesslike interpretation to...
Federal Court finds AIG liable for Murray Goulburn class action under ‘Securities Claims’ cover27 April 2021 | Insurance & Health Law
The Federal Court has found against AIG in coverage of class action claims related to the Murray Goulburn dairy group and Webster as the traded units involved met the securities definition.
Federal Court of Australia rules against TAL Life Limited8 April 2021 | Insurance & Health Law
Federal Court finds insurer guilty of breaching its duty to act with utmost good faith towards an insured.