Australia: A Turbulent Year for Australian Insurers

Last Updated: 29 February 2012
Article by Robert Crittenden and Travis Luk


In two cases this year, subject exclusion clauses have been read down so as to retain the commercial purpose of the policies.

In Mainstream Aquaculture Pty Ltd v Calliden Insurance Ltd [2011] VSC 286 (Mainstream decision), Mainstream Aquaculture Pty Ltd (Mainstream) conducted a commercial fish breeding business involving the growing and sale of fish and had a business interruption policy with Calliden Insurance Ltd (Calliden). On 26 October 2008, the property experienced a loss of electrical power supply due to the failure of a fuse, which resulted in the death of a large portion of Mainstream's fish stock. Mainstream claimed under clause three of its policy with Calliden, which provided cover for losses arising from the failure of supply from public utilities.

However, the policy contained an exclusion that stated that "we will not pay for... interruptions or interference to your business arising from loss or damage cause by... mechanical, electrical or electronic breakdown or breakages".

Croft J held that the property damage required to trigger the failure of supply provisions would necessarily be mechanical, electrical or electronic in nature. If the electronic breakdown exclusion operated in such circumstances, it would render the failure of supply cover devoid of meaning and clearly out of line with the "commercial purpose" of the parties. Croft J also held that the fuse could constitute property within the meaning of the policy and that it had sustained damage (damage to the electricity provider was a prerequisite to cover under clause 3), despite it "tripping"' as it was designed to.

A similar approach to an exclusion clause was adopted in Major Engineering Pty Ltd v CGU Insurance Ltd [2011] VSCA 226 (Major Engineering decision). Major Engineering Pty Ltd (Major) was initially sued by Timelink Pacific Pty Limited (Timelink). Timelink claimed damages arising out of the failure of two hydraulic cylinders that were supplied by Major and fitted Skandia, a 30-metre ocean racing yacht, owned by Timelink.

After a trial, an appeal, a question being remitted to the trial judge and another appeal, Major was ultimately successful in defending Timelink's claim. Major subsequently sought indemnity for the costs it incurred, claimed at $1,026,010.55, in defending the litigation pursuant to a costs extension clause contained in a policy of Broadform Liability Insurance issued by CGU Insurance Ltd (CGU). Amongst other things, CGU argued that the professional advice and service exclusion applied.

Bongiorno JJA (with whom and Hansen JJA and Kyrou AJA agreed) held that, as a commercial contract, a policy of insurance should be given a business-like interpretation, with attention being paid to the language used by the parties, the commercial circumstances that the document addresses and the objects that it is intended to secure.

With respect to exclusion 19(a), Bongiorno JJA found that Major was not providing a professional service, much less professional advice. It was simply operating its business, as defined (ie the design, manufacture and sale of general engineering and hydraulic equipment). To construe otherwise would be repugnant to the commercial efficacy of the policy. Accordingly, Bongiorno JJA upheld Major's appeal, set aside the trial judge's decision and entered judgment for Major for the declaration sought and the agreed sum.


Imprecise and incomplete communications between a broker and an insurer has led to an insurer being found on risk even though, as the judge observed, "no policy was prepared; no invoice was sent; no premium was paid".

In the Victorian Supreme Court decision of Leading Synthetics Pty Ltd v Adroit Insurance Group Pty Ltd & Anor [2011] VSC 467, Leading Synthetics Pty Ltd (Leading) instructed its broker, Austbrokers, to obtain a policy against the risk that one of its customers, Signum, might fail to pay under its trading account. By 28 April 2008, the broker and the insurer had negotiated all essential terms. Specifically, in its email of 28 April 2008, Artadius sought confirmation from the broker that the policy commencement date was 1 April 2008. Austbrokers replied that the date was acceptable.

A few days prior to 28 April 2008, Atradius sent an "indication of terms" document, expressed to be "without commitment on the part of Atradius until such time we provide you with written confirmation that we are on risk for your transaction and agree to issue a policy". Atradius argued that the email exchange of 28 April 2008 did not constitute written confirmation that it was on risk.

On 5 May 2008, the broker emailed Atradius about various risks it was then placing for Leading and noted that the cover for the Signum risk was "placed awaiting outcome on others prior to processing". The email sought Atradius' confirmation of that but when Atradius replied, it did not address the Signum risk. There matters lay until November 2008, when warnings of Signum's impending failure rose.

The only issue in dispute was whether there was an intention to create legal relations.

Imprecise and incomplete communications between a broker and an insurer has led to an insurer being found on risk.

Macaulay J found that while Atradius had conveyed that it did not wish to be bound by contract until it confirmed such in writing, he did not believe the written confirmation had to be in any particular form of words. For other credit risk covers, Atradius had used language to confirm when it was on risk, such as "the policy set to live" or "cover commences". In considering all the circumstances including the sense of urgency that characterised the final stage of negotiation, his Honour found that Atradius' email of 28 April 2008 referring to a commencement date of 1 April 2008 constituted the insurer's advice that risk had commenced. The court found that even if there had been no policy in place, Atradius was estopped from denying that such a contract of insurance had been entered into because it had induced the assumption that insurance had been placed.

Atradius also argued that Leading's failure to disclose Signum's worsening payment record was a material non-disclosure, however that argument was rejected.

Therefore, despite the insurer issuing no policy, no invoice and no premium being paid, Atradius was ordered to pay the insured loss of $720,000.

Herde v Oxford Aviation Academy (Australia) Pty Ltd [2011] NSWCA 385 is of relevance to insurers who might sometimes fail to consult with their insured about the terms on which they settle subrogated claims. Oxford Aviation Academy (Australia) Pty Ltd (Oxford) was the owner of an aircraft that crashed on a test flight, fatally injuring the pilot and significantly damaging a plane owned by the plaintiff. The plaintiff's insurer, QBE, settled its claim against the defendant's insurer, Hemisphere, for damage to the plane in the amount of $73,408 under the terms of a release. Oxford was a releasee, however any liability the pilot may have was not considered. This would not normally have been a problem, but Hemisphere was unable to pay QBE and QBE therefore obtained summary judgment directly against Oxford for the $73,408 owing to it.

Oxford appealed, arguing that the trial judge had incorrectly entered summary judgment. The sole issue on appeal was whether the defendant's insurer had authority to enter into the release on his behalf.

In the appeal, the plaintiff relied upon clause five of the Hemisphere policy, which stated:

"The company shall be entitled... to take absolute control of all negotiations and proceedings and in the name of the Insured to settle, defend or pursue any claim".

Despite the meaning and effect of that clause being clear, Giles JA held that "it cannot be said that clause five is so obvious a source of authority that the judge came to the correct result". Giles JA held that Hemisphere's failure to investigate whether the defendant or the pilot had both incurred liability for the damage suffered by the plaintiff potentially demonstrated conduct not taken in the common interest of the insurer and insured and therefore arguably not on the authority given by the defendant to Hemisphere.


In Moore v The National Mutual Life Association of Australia Limited [2011] NSWSC 411, Dr Moore commenced proceedings against The National Mutual Life Associate of Australia Limited (National Mutual), claiming benefits he did not receive between 2002 to age 65 pursuant to a policy of life insurance he obtained from National Mutual. National Mutual cross-claimed against Dr Moore, seeking to avoid the contract for fraudulent misrepresentations and non-disclosure and sought repayment of amounts it did pay to Dr Moore between 1995 and 2002.

At the time the insurance application form was completed, Dr Moore represented that:

  • He was a self-employed psychiatrist
  • His annual income was $90,000
  • He had never received advice or treatment for a mental disorder
  • He had not used or injected himself with any drug not prescribed by a doctor.

In fact, Dr Moore was a psychiatric registrar earning only $52,000 (at the time) with a long history of depression and intravenous injection of pethidine. He had been suspended from the register of medical practitioners in Tasmania, discharged from the Australian Army for misappropriating pethidine reserves and charged on two occasions in connection with the use of pethidine.

Ball J found that Dr. Moore was guilty of each of the misrepresentations and that the misrepresentations were made "with the intention that they be acted upon in the knowledge they were false" and therefore fraudulently. He held that pursuant to section 29 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth), National Mutual was entitled to avoid the contract.

As to whether National Mutual had affirmed the contract, Ball J noted that Dr Moore had to prove that National Mutual made an unequivocal election between inconsistent rights, which was communicated to Dr Moore and made with knowledge of all relevant facts. Ball J held that the mere payment of benefits with some knowledge of Dr Moore's drug use and depression was insufficient in that regard. However, he did hold that given Dr Moore would have mitigated his living expenses or tried to obtain alternative employment had the benefits not been paid, he had "altered his position" and that it would be unjust to require him to refund the payments.

The claim and cross-claim were dismissed.


The commercial approach of the courts to the interpretation of exclusion clauses, as was demonstrated in the Mainstream and Major Engineering decisions, will often result in an interpretation that is favourable to the insured. However, when an exclusion clause is unambiguous and in line with the commercial purpose of the insurance contract, the courts seem prepared to strictly apply the exclusion against the insured. Insurers should be aware of these decisions when drafting exclusions clauses.

© DLA Piper

This publication is intended as a general overview and discussion of the subjects dealt with. It is not intended to be, and should not used as, a substitute for taking legal advice in any specific situation. DLA Piper Australia will accept no responsibility for any actions taken or not taken on the basis of this publication.

DLA Piper Australia is part of DLA Piper, a global law firm, operating through various separate and distinct legal entities. For further information, please refer to

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions