Suncorp Insurance and Finance v Milano Assicurazioni [1993]

Facts

  • An agent was authorised to conclude a large insurance deal, sharing responsibility between several insurance underwriters

Issue

  • Was the defendant’s share of liability set at 20% in accordance with the insurance agreement or 32.5% in accordance with the treaty?

Decision

  • Treaty takes precedence, 32.5%

Reasoning

  • Inherently unlikely that percentages would be omitted in an agreement
  • Contracting agents usually have the authority to enter into contracts
  • The act preferring 32.5% was ratified by omission as the principal┬áhad knowledge of all material facts and assumed the agent had authority
RELATED CASE  AMB Imballaggi Plastici v Pacflex [1999]

Posted in Commercial Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 31st December 2014

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy