scholarly journals Lies, Collateral Lies and Insurance Claims: The Changing Landscape in Insurance Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 237-265
Author(s):  
Baris Soyer
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Insurance Fraud ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Insurance Law ◽  
Significant Challenge ◽  
The Common ◽  
Utmost Good Faith ◽  
The Law ◽  
Definition Of

Determining the scope of the fraudulent claims rule in insurance law has posed a significant challenge for the courts, particularly in the last two decades. In the shadow of the doctrine of utmost good faith, the law in this area has developed in an uncompromising fashion introducing draconian remedies against an assured who submits a fraudulent claim. The Supreme Court's most recent intervention has provided much needed guidance on the state of the law. This article, taking into account the fact that in other areas of law more proportionate remedies have gradually been introduced, discusses the boundaries of the fraudulent claims rule in insurance law as it applies in England and Wales and Scotland. Considering that the insurers might be tempted to introduce fraudulent claims clauses into their contracts to expand the common law definition of insurance fraud at the claims stage, this article also evaluates the wording of such clauses often used in practice and concludes that they lack the desired clarity.

Statutory Reform of the Doctrine of Uberrimae Fidei in Insurance Law: A Comparative Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 251-279
Author(s):  
Kehinde Anifalaje
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Insurance Law ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Comparative Review ◽  
The Common ◽  
Utmost Good Faith

AbstractThe common law doctrine of uberrimae fidei is pivotal to all contracts of insurance. It imposes a duty on the parties to act towards each other with utmost good faith by disclosing all material facts and not misrepresenting any fact, either before the contract is formed or while the contract subsists. This article examines the doctrine and its statutory reforms in Nigeria and the United Kingdom. It argues that, before the statutory interventions, the iniquitous doctrine was a potent weapon, most often used by insurers to defeat just and legitimate claims by an insured. Although the legislation has brought some measure of relief to the insured in these jurisdictions, the article concludes that there are still some grey areas in the Nigerian law that need to be addressed to further the cause of justice between the contracting parties.

scholarly journals Misrepresentation and Concealment as affecting Policies of Insurance

1896 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 116-139
Author(s):  
William Harvey
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Life Assurance ◽  
General Rules ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Common ◽  
Utmost Good Faith ◽  
The Law

It will probably conduce to clearness if I explain at the outset the order in which I propose to deal with the subject of this paper.In the first part of the paper I propose to discuss, in relation to policies of insurance, (1) the general rules of law in regard to fraud or misrepresentation in the preliminary negotiations, as invalidating contracts; and (2) the rules of law as to concealment in relation to contracts, such as contracts of insurance, in regard to which the law requires the utmost good faith on both sides. I shall also consider the effect of misrepresentation or concealment by a third party, not a party to the contract.In the second part I shall refer to the usual forms of provision in policies of life assurance, relating to the answers by the assured to the questions in the proposal, and consider their effect in modifying the rules of the common law. In this connection I shall endeavour to classify policies on well-marked lines of distinction, and will also deal with the question of the interpretation of the usual inquiries in the proposal, and the rules of construction of ambiguous or contradictory provisions in the policy or declaration.

The Coalition's Plan to Regulate Industrial Relations

1993 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Braham Dabscheck
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Industrial Relations ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
The Common ◽  
Industrial Conflict ◽  
The Law

In October 1992 the federal coalition released Jobsback, a statement of its industrial relations policies. The article situates Jobsback in the context of the evolution of the coalition's industrial relations policies since the Fraser years, outlines its major features, and provides a critique. Jobsback erects a new regulatory schema under a banner of deregulation. Three key elements are contained in Jobsback. They are tribunal avoidance and the use of the common law, legislatively imposed employment rules to ‘aid’ the transition from an award to a non-award system, and enterprise confinement. The article draws attention to the coalition's views concerning industrial conflict, constitutional issues, transitional problems associated with establishing legislatively imposed workplace rules, minima in workplace agreements, the Office of the Employee Advocate, equality before the law and good faith bargaining.

scholarly journals GOOD FAITH IN FRANCHISE CONTRACT

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (19) ◽  
pp. 118-127
Author(s):  
Nurli Yaacob ◽  
Nasri Naiimi
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Relational Contracts ◽  
Law System ◽  
Freedom Of Contract ◽  
Term Contract ◽  
The Common ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right

Good faith has been defined as justice, fairness, reasonableness, decency, taking no chances, and so on. The concept of good faith has long been rooted in contract law under the jurisdiction of Civil law, although the definition of it is still debated until today. However, the view of the Common Law tradition does not recognize the concept of good faith as long as the contract is entered into with the freedom of contract and both parties abide by the terms of the contract. Given that a franchise contract involves a long-term contract and always been developed, it is impossible to define both rights and responsibilities base on express terms only. As such, the franchise contract gives the franchisor the right to exercise its discretion in executing the contract. It is in this context that the element of good faith is very important to ensure that the franchisor does not take advantage of the franchisee and that the business continues to prosper. Therefore, the objective of this article is to discuss the concept of good faith in a franchise contract. The findings show that the common law system that initially rejected the application of the concept of good faith also changed its approach and began to recognize the concept of good faith as it is very important for relational contracts such as franchise contracts.

Time for an English Commercial Code?

1997 ◽  
Vol 56 (3) ◽  
pp. 516-536
Author(s):  
Dame Mary Arden
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Law Reform ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Commercial Code ◽  
Unique Experience ◽  
The Common ◽  
Systematic Development ◽  
The Law ◽  
Lord Chancellor ◽  
Law Commission

Parliament has imposed on the Law Commission the duty to review the law of England and Wales “with a view to its systematic development and reform, including in particular the codification of [the] law … and generally the simplification and modernisation of the law”. There are a number of points which flow from this. First, as a body which reviews great swathes of the common law to see if they require to be modernised or simplified, the Law Commission has a unique standpoint from which to view the strengths and weaknesses of the common law method. Second, it has unique experience of law reform and the Parliamentary process. Third, in discharge of its functions, it has an interest in seeing that, if codification is appropriate, a recommendation to that effect is made to the Lord Chancellor. It need not be the Law Commission which carries out the recommendation, and indeed the Law Commission could not carry out a project purely of its own initiative.

Facticity

2020 ◽  
pp. 899-916
Author(s):  
Paul Daly
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Traditional Approach ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Comparative Perspective ◽  
Evolutionary Path ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Factual Error ◽  
Administrative Action ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law

This chapter analyses, from a comparative perspective, the law of judicial review of administrative action as it relates to factual error. The analyses is conducted in four common law jurisdictions (Australia, Canada, England and Wales, and Ireland), which have a ‘filial relationship’ as part of the common law tradition of controlling administrative action through the ordinary courts. The chapter outlines the traditional approach to judicial review of factual error in the four jurisdictions, characterized by limited judicial oversight of issues of fact. Next, the chapter describes the recent evolution in the law of judicial review of factual error. Although the evolutionary path has not led to the same destination in each jurisdiction, there has been increased judicial willingness to examine alleged factual errors in judicial review proceedings. However, the factors which have influenced the evolution of the law are different in each jurisdiction.

Bhasin v Hrynew - The New Duty of Good Faith in Contract

1969 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brittany Scott
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
The Past ◽  
Legal Traditions ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
Contractual Obligations

Over the past number of years, the law surrounding the requirement to operate in good faith in conducting contractual obligations has been a developing principle in common law countries from Australia, to the United Kingdom to Canada. In Canada, this principle has developed separately within the civil and common law legal traditions respectively. While the Quebec Civil Code has historically provided for an expectation of parties to a contract to operate in good faith, the common law in Canada has not been as clear.  Prior to 2014, the Canadian common law duty to negotiate in good faith was an unsettled body of law, recognized in certain areas, but not across the discipline as a whole. It has only been since the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Bhasin v. Hrynew that this duty to negotiate in good faith has been outlined as a coherent set of guiding principles. Parties to a contract are now both bound by a general organizing principle of good faith in contracts and are expected to act honestly in the performance of their contractual obligations. While new to the Canadian common law, numerous cases have been quick to test the court’s interpretation of this change in scope to the law of good faith. As Canadian common law jurisprudence moves forward, this principle will continue to expand and develop.

Reforming the Law of Unfitness to Plead in England and Wales

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miranda Bevan ◽  
David Ormerod
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Criminal Trial ◽  
Law Reform ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
Significant Development ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
Draft Bill

This chapter reviews the legal framework in England and Wales for dealing with defendants in criminal trials who are ‘unfit to plead’, and considers efforts to reform the legal test and procedures. The chapter offers a critique of the present law governing fitness to plead and its failure to reflect modern-day trial processes and psychiatric understanding. It examines law reform proposals made over recent decades and how these have failed to produce significant development in the common law. It focuses in particular on the Law Commission’s recent report and draft Bill in 2016. That report seeks to provide a fair and effective process for those who are unable to participate effectively in their criminal trial and to ensure that defendants’ rights are respected.

Brownsword, R and Howells, G, ‘The implementation of the EC Directive on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts – some unresolved questions’ [1995] JBL 243. Brownsword, R, Howells, G and Wilhelmsson, T (eds), Welfarism in Contract, 1994, Aldershot: Dartmouth. Burrows, A, (ed), Essays on the Law of Restitution, 1991, Oxford: Clarendon. Burrows, A, The Law of Restitution, 1993, London: Butterworths. Burrows, A, Understanding the Law of Obligations, 1998, Oxford: Hart. Burrows, A, ‘Free acceptance and the law of restitution’ (1988) 104 LQR 576. Carr, C, ‘Lloyd’s Bank Ltd v Bundy’ (1975) 38 MLR 463. Cheshire, G, Fifoot, C and Furmston, M, Law of Contract, 13th edn, 1996, London: Butterworths/Tolley. Chitty (Guest, AG (ed)), Contracts: General Principles, 27th edn, 1994, London: Sweet & Maxwell. Coase, R, ‘The problem of social cost’ (1960) 3 Journal of Law and Economics 1. Collins, H, Law of Contract, 3rd edn, 1997, London: Butterworths. Collins, H, ‘Good faith in European contract law’ (1994) OJLS 229. Cooke, PJ and Oughton, DW, The Common Law of Obligations, 3rd edn, 2000, London: Butterworths. Coote, B, Exception Clauses, 1964, London: Sweet & Maxwell. Coote, B, ‘The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977’ (1978) 41 MLR 312. De Lacey, J, ‘Selling in the course of a business under the Sale of Goods Act 1979’ (1999) 62 MLR 776. Dean, M, ‘Unfair contract terms – the European approach’ (1993) 56 MLR 581. Duffy, P, ‘Unfair terms and the draft EC Directive’ (1993) JBL 67. Evans, A, ‘The Anglo-American mailing rule’ (1966) 15 ICLQ 553. Fehlberg, B, ‘The husband, the bank, the wife and her signature – the sequel’ (1996) 59 MLR 675.

1995 ◽  
pp. 808-808
Keyword(s):  
Law And Economics ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
European Contract ◽  
Consumer Contracts ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
Unfair Terms

5. Character evidence

2019 ◽  
pp. 79-106
Author(s):  
Maureen Spencer ◽  
John Spencer
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Character Evidence ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Definition Of

This chapter, which focuses on the admissibility and evidential worth of character evidence, explains the definition of bad character under the Criminal Justice Act 2003. It examines how bad character evidence of the defendant may be admitted through one of the ‘gateways’ under the Act. It reviews the evidential worth of the character evidence if admitted and explains the difference between propensity and credibility. The law on the admissibility of the bad character of non-defendant witnesses is explained. The chapter concludes with the admissibility of good character evidence, governed by the common law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document