King v CGU-VACC Insurance Limited

NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL

CITATION:
King v CGU-VACC Insurance Limited [2008] NSWCA 236

FILE NUMBER(S):
40108/08

HEARING DATE(S):
17 September 2008

EX TEMPORE DATE:
17 September 2008

PARTIES:
Treavor King (Applicant)
CGU-VACC Insurance Limited (Respondent)

JUDGMENT OF:
Beazley JA McColl JA

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION:
Supreme Court - Common Law Division

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S):
SC 15606/07

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER:
Harrison AsJ

LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION:
8 April 2008

LOWER COURT MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:
King v CGU-VACC

COUNSEL:
M Rogers (Applicant)
M Lee (Respondent)

SOLICITORS:
Fitzpatrick Solicitors (Applicant)
William Roberts Lawyers (Respondent)

CATCHWORDS:
Leave to appeal - circumstances of damage to vehicle clearly within exclusion provisions of insurance policy

LEGISLATION CITED:

CASES CITED:

TEXTS CITED:

DECISION:
The summons for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

JUDGMENT:

- 1 -

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COURT OF APPEAL

CA 40108/08
BEAZLEY JA
McCOLL JA
Ex tempore 17 September 2008

Treavor King v CGU-VACC Insurance Limited

Judgment

THE COURT: The Court refuses leave in this matter.
The circumstances in which the vehicle was damaged were unambiguously covered by the exclusions. There is a question as to whether those exclusions operate when a vehicle is stolen, although, as indicated by Associate Justice Harrison, they would not. However, that is not the point in issue before us.
Further, the claim is a relatively small claim, although it is undoubtedly very important to the claimant. Nonetheless, the fact that it is a small claim is relevant to the exercise of the Court’s discretion.
The Court dismisses the summons for leave to appeal with costs.

**********

LAST UPDATED:
30 September 2008

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *King v CGU-VACC Insurance Limited*, the applicant sought leave to appeal a decision of the primary judge concerning an insurance policy. The dispute arose from damage sustained by the applicant's vehicle, which the insurer, CGU-VACC Insurance Limited, denied liability for on the basis that the damage fell within exclusion provisions of the policy. The matter was heard by Beazley JA and McColl JA in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the circumstances in which the damage to the applicant's vehicle occurred were clearly within the exclusion provisions of the insurance policy. This required the Court to interpret the terms of the policy and apply them to the factual matrix of the damage.

The Court of Appeal considered the terms of the insurance policy and the findings of the primary judge. Their Honours concluded that the damage to the vehicle was indeed within the exclusion provisions as found by the primary judge. Consequently, the Court determined that there were no grounds for granting leave to appeal. The summons for leave to appeal was therefore dismissed with costs.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established