LITT
Try LITT free
Stork Technology Services Asia Pte Ltd (formerly known as Eastburn Stork Pte Ltd) v First Capital Insurance Ltd [2006] SGHC 101
The court held that the notice provision in the insurance policy was a condition precedent to liability, and the insured's failure to provide immediate notice of an occurrence that may give rise to a claim entitled the insurer to repudiate liability.
China Insurance Co (Singapore) Pte Ltd v Liberty Insurance Pte Ltd (formerly known as Liberty Citystate Insurance Pte Ltd) [2005] SGHC 40
The court held that there was no double insurance because the plaintiff's and defendant's policies covered different risks and subject matters, and that the parol evidence rule (s 94 Evidence Act) did not apply to the facts as the parties were strangers to each other's contracts.
Sitra Wood Products Pte Ltd v Royal and Sun Alliance Insurance (S) Pte Ltd [2001] SGHC 204
An insurance contract is a contract of indemnity, and the insured cannot recover more than the actual loss suffered. Payments received by the insured from a third party (the buyer) in satisfaction of contractual obligations must be taken into account in diminishing the loss.
Chiu Teng Construction Co Pte Ltd v The Hartford Insurance Company (Singapore) Ltd (formerly known as The People's Insurance Co Ltd) [2001] SGHC 119
An insurer is entitled to raise policy defences against a third party who has stepped into the shoes of the insured under the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act, and a final judgment against the insured is conclusive evidence of liability and quantum against the insurer.
Pan-United Shipyard Pte Ltd v India International Insurance Pte Ltd [2000] SGHC 14
The High Court dismissed the claim, ruling that the insurance policy's indemnity was restricted to liabilities incurred in the capacity of 'Owner'. It did not cover losses arising from the plaintiff's role as a ship repairer.