FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Wrigley v Insurance Australia Limited [2016] FCA 638
File number: TAD 3 of 2015 Judge: MOSHINSKY J Date of judgment: 2 June 2016 Catchwords: INSURANCE – home and contents insurance policy – residential dwelling severely damaged by fire – insurer alleged that the fire was started by the home owners – whether insurer established on the balance of probabilities that the owners started the fire Legislation: Criminal Code Act 1924 (Tas), Sch 1, ss 267, 268 and 269
Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), s 140
Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth), ss 13, 54, 57
Cases cited: Ashby v Slipper (2014) 219 FCR 322
Commonwealth v Fernando (2012) 200 FCR 1
Date of hearing: 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 March 2016 Registry: Tasmania Division: General Division National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations Sub-area: Commercial Contracts, Banking, Finance and Insurance Category: Catchwords Number of paragraphs: 96 Counsel for the Applicants: DJ Gunson SC with S Chopping Solicitor for the Applicants: S Chopping Counsel for the Respondent: M Douglas Solicitor for the Respondent: Dohertys Barristers & Solicitors ORDERS
TAD 3 of 2015 BETWEEN: BRETT ROBERT WRIGLEY
First Applicant
YVONNE WRIGLEY
Second Applicant
AND: INSURANCE AUSTRALIA LIMITED (ACN 000 016 722) TRADING AS NRMA INSURANCE
Respondent
JUDGE:
MOSHINSKY J
DATE OF ORDER:
2 JUNE 2016
THE COURT DECLARES THAT:
1.The respondent is liable to indemnify the applicants in the amount of $497,900 in accordance with the terms and conditions of the home and contents policy of insurance (policy number HOM 491494659) issued by the respondent to the applicants on or about 16 February 2014 and in force from that date until on or about 16 February 2015 in respect of the loss by fire that occurred on 4 October 2014.
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
2.The respondent pay the applicants interest (in respect of the period from 2 December 2014 to 11 March 2016) in the amount of $31,735.55 and (in respect of the period from 12 March 2016 to the date of payment) at a daily rate of $68.21.
3.The respondent pay the applicants’ costs of the proceeding.
4.If either party seeks a variation of orders 2 or 3 above, the party may give notice in writing to the Court and the other party within three business days.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
MOSHINSKY J:
Introduction
On the evening of Saturday, 4 October 2014, the home of the applicants (Mr and Mrs Wrigley) at 5 Claridge Court, Triabunna, Tasmania, was severely damaged by fire. Mr and Mrs Wrigley lived in the house with their daughter and grandson. All of them were out of the house at the time. The fire started in the family room at the back of the house, in the part of the room used by Mrs…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Wrigley v Insurance Australia Limited 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
- [2016] FCA 638
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court found that the circumstantial evidence strongly pointed against the proposition that the applicants started the fire, and the expert evidence, while not definitive, was subject to limitations. The court concluded that the insurer had not established on the balance of probabilities that the applicants were responsible for starting the fire. Therefore, the court found in favour of the applicants and ordered that the insurer pay the applicants' costs and interest on the amount of the insurance policy. The court also provided an opportunity for either party to seek a variation of the orders within three business days.
The court ordered that the insurer pay the applicants interest and their costs of the proceeding. The interest was to be paid in two amounts: $31,735.55 for the period from 2 December 2014 to 11 March 2016, and a daily rate of $68.21 for the period from 12 March 2016 to the date of payment. The court also ordered that if either party sought a variation of orders 2 or 3, they could do so by giving notice in writing within three business days. The entry of orders was dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
Orders
Orders of the court
2. The respondent pay the applicants interest (in respect of the period from 2 December 2014 to 11 March 2016) in the amount of $31,735.55 and (in respect of the period from 12 March 2016 to the date of payment) at a daily rate of $68.21.
3. The respondent pay the applicants’ costs of the proceeding.
4. If either party seeks a variation of orders 2 or 3 above, the party may give notice in writing to the Court and the other party within three business days.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
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
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.