Kaboko Mining Limited v Van Heerden (No 3)
Case
•
[2018] FCA 2055
•19 December 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Kaboko Mining Limited v Van Heerden (No 3) [2018] FCA 2055
[2018] FCA 2055
19 December 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Kaboko Mining Limited brought an action against its former directors and officers, seeking compensation for breaches of statutory, fiduciary, and common law duties. The defendants sought a declaration that they were not liable to indemnify the plaintiff for any losses it may suffer in the proceeding. The defendants argued that any loss suffered by the plaintiff arose out of its insolvency, and that an Insolvency Exclusion in the directors' and officers' liability insurance policy precluded indemnification. The court had to determine whether the Insolvency Exclusion applied to deprive the defendants of indemnification by the insurer, AIG. The court considered the wording of the exclusion and its purpose, as well as the commercial purpose of the insurance policy.
The court found that the Insolvency Exclusion did not apply to deprive the defendants of indemnification for the losses claimed by the plaintiff, except for the costs and disbursements of the external controllers, which were attributable to the plaintiff's insolvency. The court held that the relevant loss was not the loss of the plaintiff's opportunity to exploit a valuable commercial opportunity, but rather the loss suffered by the plaintiff as a result of the defendants' breaches of duty. The court noted that the directors' and officers' insurance policy was designed to protect directors and officers from liability for breaches of duty, and that the exclusion should not be interpreted to defeat the commercial purpose of the policy. The court also rejected the defendants' argument that the Statutory Demand and the failure to meet that demand established the actual insolvency of the plaintiff, and that such insolvency led directly to the claimed costs of receivership and administration in insolvency.
The court ordered that the answer to the preliminary question was "No", that the defendants pay the plaintiff's costs of the application, and that a consent minute as to directions be filed within 21 days, failing which a case management hearing be fixed for 10.00 am on 7 February 2019.
The court found that the Insolvency Exclusion did not apply to deprive the defendants of indemnification for the losses claimed by the plaintiff, except for the costs and disbursements of the external controllers, which were attributable to the plaintiff's insolvency. The court held that the relevant loss was not the loss of the plaintiff's opportunity to exploit a valuable commercial opportunity, but rather the loss suffered by the plaintiff as a result of the defendants' breaches of duty. The court noted that the directors' and officers' insurance policy was designed to protect directors and officers from liability for breaches of duty, and that the exclusion should not be interpreted to defeat the commercial purpose of the policy. The court also rejected the defendants' argument that the Statutory Demand and the failure to meet that demand established the actual insolvency of the plaintiff, and that such insolvency led directly to the claimed costs of receivership and administration in insolvency.
The court ordered that the answer to the preliminary question was "No", that the defendants pay the plaintiff's costs of the application, and that a consent minute as to directions be filed within 21 days, failing which a case management hearing be fixed for 10.00 am on 7 February 2019.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Insurance Law
Legal Concepts
-
Contract Formation
-
Breach of Contract
-
Insolvency Exclusion
-
Admissibility of Evidence
-
Interlocutory Orders
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Insurance Australia Limited t/as CGU Insurance v Capral Limited [2025] FCAFC 46
Cases Citing This Decision
10
Insurance Australia Limited t/as CGU Insurance v Capral Limited
[2025] FCAFC 46
AIG Australia Limited v Kaboko Mining Limited
[2019] FCAFC 96
Cases Cited
13
Statutory Material Cited
1
Kaboko Mining Ltd v Noble Resources International Pte Ltd
[2015] WASC 67
McCann v Switzerland Insurance Australia Ltd
[2000] HCA 65
Todd v Alterra at Lloyds Ltd
[2016] FCAFC 15