Green v AMP Life Limited

Case [2005] NSWCA 354

Reported Decision:

 (2005) 13 ANZ Insurance Cases 90-125

Court of Appeal


CITATION:

Green v AMP Life Limited [2005] NSWCA 354
HEARING DATE(S):

10 October 2005
 
JUDGMENT DATE: 


14 October 2005

JUDGMENT OF:

Spigelman CJ at 1; Giles JA at 2; Basten JA at 3
DECISION:

Appeal dismissed with costs.
CATCHWORDS:

CONTRACT - life insurance policy - insured suffered mental illness - payments by insurer stopped after 2 years - whether insurance policy had been amended so as to limit payment of benefits to 2 years - whether intent of the parties objectively ascertained was that the variation took effect - whether variation made in accordance with Life Insurance Act (1995) (Cth). - ESTOPPEL - whether insurer estopped from asserting the variation of the policy - whether there was an implied representation that there were no significant limitations or restrictions on payments under the policy. - TRADE PRACTICES - whether insurer's conduct in providing a statement which did not itself refer to the 2 year limitation applying to payments made in relation to a mental illness was misleading or deceptive - whether insurer was in breach of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) for failing to advise the insured that the insurance policy had been so amended
LEGISLATION CITED:

Life Insurance Act 1945 (Cth)
Life Insurance Act 1995 (Cth)
Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)
CASES CITED:

Australian Mutual Provident Society v Goulden (1986) 160 CLR 330
Butcher v Lachlan Elder Realty Pty Ltd [2004] HCA 60; (2004) 79 ALJR 308
Foran v Wight (1989) 168 CLR 385
Green v AMP Life Limited [2005] NSWSC 370
Henville v Walker (2001) 206 CLR 459
Legione v Hateley (1983) 152 CLR 406
Masters v Cameron (1954) 91 CLR 353
Waltons Stores (Interstate) Ltd v Maher (1988) 164 CLR 387
PARTIES:

Gary Sydney Green (Appellant)
AMP Life Limited (First Respondent)
Roger Patterson (Second Respondent)
John Kelly (Third Respondent)
Kevin McLean (Fourth Respondent)

FILE NUMBER(S):

CA 40410/05
COUNSEL:

M. Heath (Appellant)
N. Perram/T. Maltz (Respondents)
SOLICITORS:

Malcolm Wright & Company (Appellant)
Mallesons Stephen Jaques (Respondents)

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION:

Supreme Court - Equity Division

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S):

SC 3268/04

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER:

Campbell J




                          CA 40410/05

                          SPIGELMAN CJ
                          GILES JA
                          BASTEN JA

                          14 October 2005
GARY SYDNEY GREEN v AMP LIFE LIMITED & ORS
Judgment

1 SPIGELMAN CJ: I agree with Basten JA.

2 GILES JA: I agree with Basten JA.

3 BASTEN JA: For some 26 years prior to April 2002, Mr Green (the Appellant) was a financial planner and an agent selling insurance policies underwritten by AMP Life Limited. He was a member of the Australasian Association of AMP Society Agents (“the Association”).

4 On 11 April 1997, an arrangement was created by trust deed known as the Income and Agency Protection Plan. The purpose of the plan was to provide income protection for agents in the event of disability. The mechanism by which that protection was provided was that trustees of the plan entered into (or obtained the benefit…

Continue reading Green v AMP Life Limited

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Green v AMP Life Limited [2005] NSWCA 354
Case
[2005] NSWCA 354
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The dispute in *Green v AMP Life Limited* concerned a life insurance policy where the insurer, AMP Life Limited, ceased making payments to the insured, Mr Green, after two years of him suffering a mental illness. The insured contended that the policy entitled him to ongoing payments, while the insurer argued that the policy had been amended to limit such payments to two years. The matter was heard by Spigelman CJ, Giles and Basten JJA in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The court was required to determine whether the insurance policy had been validly amended to impose a two-year limit on payments for mental illness. This involved assessing whether the parties' objective intent was that such a variation took effect and whether the variation complied with the requirements of the *Life Insurance Act 1995* (Cth). Additionally, the court considered whether AMP Life Limited was estopped from asserting the variation, based on an implied representation that there were no significant limitations on payments. Finally, the court examined whether AMP Life Limited's conduct in providing a statement that did not refer to the two-year limitation was misleading or deceptive under the *Trade Practices Act 1974* (Cth), or if there was a breach of that Act for failing to advise of the amendment.

The court reasoned that the evidence did not establish that the parties intended the variation to take effect, nor that the variation was made in accordance with the *Life Insurance Act 1995* (Cth). The court found that AMP Life Limited had not made any implied representation that there were no significant limitations on payments, and therefore, the insurer was not estopped from asserting the variation. Furthermore, the court concluded that the conduct of AMP Life Limited was not misleading or deceptive under the *Trade Practices Act 1974* (Cth).

The appeal was dismissed with costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal dismissed with costs.

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.