Sewell v Home Protector Ins. Company Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Belize
• Judge: Shanks, J.
• Judgment Date: 28 January 2000
• Date: 28 January 2000
• Court: High Court (Belize)
• Docket Number: 25 of 1999

High Court

Shanks, J.

25 of 1999

Sewell

and

Home Protector Ins. Co. Ltd.

Appearances:

Mr. Wilfred Erlington for the plaintiff.

Mr. Fred Lumor for the defendant.

Insurance Law - Home and contents policy of insurance — Property extended — Original policy divided into separate policies for home and contents respectively — Property destroyed by fire — Contents claim settled — Insurance company refused to settle claim for house — Whether the policy of insurance in respect of the house was void as a result of the alleged misrepresentation or non disclosure of the plaintiff in failing to indicate on his proposal form that the property was insured under another policy — Non-notification — Whether the plaintiff failed to notify the insurers of the damage by the fire — Whether the release signed by the plaintiff upon receipt of the monies in respect of the contents claim released the insurers from liability in respect of the house claim — Finding that the agent of the plaintiff had informed the plaintiff so that there was no misrepresentation — Finding that the defendant had immediate notice of the fire since the defendant had known of the fire within minutes — Finding that the release signed by the plaintiff related only to the contents claim and was not a waiver of the plaintiff's rights with respect to the dwelling house.

Shanks, J.

1 This is a claim under an insurance policy covering a dwelling at 126 Vista Del Mar, Ladyville, Belize City. The policy in question is No. 11078 issued by the defendants. The sum insured is $34,000.00. The premium was $15.30 payable weekly. The dwelling in question burnt down on the 30th of September, 1998. There is no issue raised as to the quantum payable if the claim is otherwise valid. I have heard evidence from the plaintiff himself, Mr. Sewell, from Mr. Moore who is the Managing Director of the defendant Insurance Company and from Mr. Nunez who is their Claims Manager.

2 I allowed Mr. Lumor who is representing the defendant to call Mr. Nunez after Mr. Lumor had closed his case because he had complained, in my view justifiably; that he had been taken by surprise in relation to one matter on which Mr. Nunez could assist, namely, whether the plaintiff had signed a Claim Form at the defendant's Office.

3 The history of the matter is as follows: The plaintiff worked for a Company called Belize Distributors Ltd. At the time Philip Moore, who is the brother of Mr. Moore, the Managing Director of the defendant, was the Manager of that office. In 1995 the plaintiff whilst working at the office was sold by a Mr. Sebastian, who is the defendant's agent, an Insurance Policy covering both his dwelling and the contents. That was policy 8986. The premium under that policy was $10.58 payable weekly. The sum insured was a total of $23,500.00. The Policy itself says that the buildings are worth $10,500.00 and that the contents are worth $13,000.00. However, as was admitted by Mr. Moore, that must be an error and indeed the Proposal Form shows those figures as being the other way around, that is, the $10,500.00 was for the contents and the $13,000.00 was for the dwelling. The Proposal Forms also breaks down the premium as between contents and dwelling and assigns $4.73 to contents and $5.85 to the dwelling. The plaintiff paid his premiums under Policy 8986 weekly and obtained Mr. Sebastian's initials as a receipt against each weekly payment in a payment book which I was shown.

4 In 1997 the plaintiff extended his dwelling house and having done so spoke to Mr. Sebastian about it and Mr. Sebastian suggested he increase his insurance and went with him and measured the whole building in its extended form. Mr. Sebastian recommended that he insure the whole building and said that he Mr. Sebastian would sort out the formalities. He came with a new policy and indeed a new Proposal Form and the Policy became No. 11078 which is the one in question in these proceedings. He told the plaintiff that the new Policy 11078 would cover the dwelling house while the old one, 8986 would continue to cover only the contents. The plaintiff continued to pay premiums and he now had two payments books. The old payment book recorded a payment of $4.73 each week relating to Policy 8986 and the new payment book records a weekly payment of $15.30 which relates to Policy 1107...