SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION:
Anderson v AON Risk Services Australia Ltd & Anor [2004] QSC 049
PARTIES:
MALCOLM ANDERSON
(plaintiff)
v
AON RISK SERVICES AUSTRALIA LIMITED
ACN 000 434 720
(first defendant)
HISCOX DEDICATED CORPORATE MEMBER LTD
(second defendant)FILE NO/S:
S 2097 of 2000
DIVISION:
Trial Division
PROCEEDING:
Civil Trial
ORIGINATING COURT: Supreme Court at Brisbane DELIVERED ON:
19 March 2004
DELIVERED AT:
Brisbane
HEARING DATE:
9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 16 February 2004
JUDGE:
McMurdo J
ORDER:
Judgment for the second defendant against the plaintiff
CATCHWORDS:
INSURANCE – GENERAL – MISREPRESENTATION AND NON-DISCLOSURE – STATUTORY REMEDIES –where agreed value policy pending independent valuation – where insured values grossly exceed market values – where alleged misrepresentation and nondisclosure by insured – where misrepresentation and nondisclosure not fraudulent – whether insurer is entitled to reduce its liability to the amount that would place the insurer in a position in which the insurer would have been if the misrepresentation had not been made
PROCEDURE – SUPREME COURT PROCEDURE – QUEENSLAND – PLEADING – GENERALLY – where plaintiff says that insured items were stolen – where defendant did not deny nor admit this statement – where defendant provided particulars suggesting fraudulent claiming by the plaintiff – whether the defendant can advance a fraud case absent a denial that the goods were stolen
Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth), s 28(3)
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules, r 150, r 166, r 166(4)Advance (NSW) Insurance Agencies Pty Ltd v Matthews (1989) 166 CLR 606, followed
CIC Insurance Limited v Midaz Pty Ltd & Anor (1998) 10 ANZ Insurance Cases 61-394, cited
Orb Holdings Pty Ltd v Lombard Insurance Co (Australia) Ltd [1994] QCA 155; [1995] Qd R 51, cited
Palamisto General Enterprises S A v Ocean Marine Insurance Co Ltd [1972] 2 QB 625 (CA), cited
Simon v NRMA Insurance Ltd (Unreported, Supreme Court of New South Wales Court of Appeal, 22 October 1991), citedCOUNSEL:
E J Lennon QC for the plaintiff
S S Couper QC for the first defendant on 9 February 2004
G E Hiley QC, with S S Couper QC and S R Lumb for the second defendant on 9-10 February 2004S S Couper QC, with S R Lumb, for the second defendant on 11-16 February 2004
SOLICITORS:
Lyonsmith Commercial Lawyers for the plaintiff
Sparke Helmore Solicitors for the first defendantPhillips Fox Lawyers for the second defendant
J:McMURDO The plaintiff, Mr Anderson, is a 52 year man who for many years has conducted an apparently successful business of the provision of security services. He has spent a considerable amount of his leisure time in hunting, both in this country and overseas. His safaris have taken him to Africa, North America and elsewhere. Many of the animals he shot were sent to a taxidermist to provide him with what hunters call their trophies. At the beginning of 1999, his trophies decorated rooms of his house at Bellbird Park near Ipswich, where he then lived…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Anderson v AON Risk Services Australia Ltd and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2004] QSC 49
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues were whether the insurer could rely on the misrepresentation and nondisclosure defences, and if the insurer could advance a fraud case despite not denying the theft. The court needed to determine if the alleged misrepresentation and nondisclosure were fraudulent and, if not, whether the insurer could still reduce its liability under the policy terms.
The court held that the insurer could not rely on the misrepresentation and nondisclosure defences if they were not fraudulent. The court found that the insurer had not proven the misrepresentation and nondisclosure were fraudulent. Consequently, the court held that the insurer was not entitled to reduce its liability based on those defences. The court also found that the insurer could not advance a fraud case without denying that the goods were stolen, which the insurer had not done.
The final orders were that the second defendant, AON Risk Services Australia Ltd, was awarded judgment against the plaintiff, Anderson.
Orders
Orders of the court
Judgment for the second defendant against the plaintiff
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.