Australia: The Implications Of Dual Insurance

Last Updated: 4 April 2008
Article by Kathy McCarthy and Alix Osborn

The recent Victorian Court of Appeal decision of Insurance Australia Ltd v HIH & Ors deals with a situation where two relevant insurance policies cover the same event. The Court of Appeal, constituted by Chernov, Ashley and Redlich JA, upheld the trial judge's decision that a sub-contractor does not have a right of repayment under a relevant insurance policy if it is the case that he has already been indemnified under another policy in respect of the same risk.

The case also contains useful commentary on the nature of insurance contracts, dual insurance, what constitutes a payment pursuant to an insurance contract, and the nature of indemnification.

Main Facts

  • In 1989, Screenco entered into a contract with the Australian Grand Prix Corporation to erect a large video screen at Albert Park, in connection with the 1989 Australian Grand Prix. Screenco engaged R L Dew ("Dew") to erect the necessary scaffolding to support the screen. Dew then sub-contracted that work to Ronald Steele ("Steele").
  • Steele carried out the work over two days in March 1989. The scaffolding included a horizontal beam, from which the screen was to be suspended. Once Steele had completed the scaffolding and left the site, the screen was hung from the beam. The beam was not strong enough and it buckled, causing the screen to fall to the ground and be destroyed.
  • Steele held liability insurance, including public liability cover, under a policy with HIH Casualty & General Insurance Limited ("HIH"), prior to their collapse. The policy responded to the incident.
  • So too did a second policy, which had been taken out by the Australian Grand Prix Corporation with the Appellant (then known as SGIC General Insurance) ("SGIC"). Subject to certain exclusions, terms and conditions, the SGIC policy covered the event in question, as its coverage extended to contractors and sub-contractors of the Australian Grand Prix Corporation.
  • In 1989, Screenco bought proceedings in the NSW Supreme Court against Dew and Steele, claiming damages as a result of the destruction of the screen. Steele called on the HIH policy in connection with these proceedings. HIH accepted that the policy responded and undertook the defence of the claim on Steele's behalf. Then, on 27 August 2001, HIH was placed into liquidation.
  • Following HIH's liquidation, Steel applied for assistance from HCSL, a non-profit company set up by the insurance industry to administer the $640 million HIH Claims Support Scheme ("the Scheme"). The Scheme was established by the Commonwealth Government to assist persons disadvantaged by the collapse of HIH.
  • HCSL was unsuccessful in its defence of the Screenco claim. On 11 November 2002, Sceenco obtained judgment against Dew and Steele in the NSW proceedings in the amount of $1,461,045. In the contribution proceedings against Dew and Steele, Steele was held liable to contribute 100% and to pay Dew's costs.
  • The insurer appointed by HCSL to manage Steele's defence, QBE Management Services, paid 90% of the judgment debt to Screenco and 90% of Screenco's costs. These payments were funded by the Scheme and payment of those moneys represented acceptance by HCSL of an offer of assignment of rights, which Steele had signed when he applied for assistance from HCSL.
  • In the meantime, in June 2000 and well before the NSW proceedings had resolved, HIH and Steele commenced proceedings in the Victorian Supreme Court against SGIC. HIH claimed equitable contribution against SGIC on the basis that SGIC were liability insurers of Steele for the same risk. HIH claimed that there was double insurance.
  • In the Victorian proceedings, Steele claimed that, if he had any liability to Screenco or Dew in the NSW proceedings, it was liability for which he was entitled to be indemnified under the SGIC policy. It was pleaded that SGIC was liable in equity to make contribution to HIH in a sum that was just and equitable, and that it was just and equitable that each HIH and SGIC pay 50% of any sum for which Steele should become liable.
  • By the time the Victorian proceedings came to trial, the NSW proceedings had concluded. SGIC maintained at trial that the claim to indemnity from SGIC must fail because Steele had already been indemnified by another insurer, being HCSL, and that, in any event, what had been paid was an indemnity, and Steele had no right to be indemnified twice. The success of Steele's claim in the Victorian proceedings therefore depended on characterisation of the payments made by HCSL as not being an indemnification.
  • The trial judge in the Victorian proceedings focused on whether HCSL should be characterised as an insurer, whether the assignment agreement was a contract of indemnity insurance, and whether amounts paid on Steele's behalf constituted an indemnity. He found that HCSL and/or the Scheme was not an insurer. He further held that what had been paid on Steele's behalf was not an indemnity.
  • The trial judge, having rejected the arguments put forward by SGIC, including its reliance on certain exclusion clauses in the policy, made the declaration sought by Steele, being that SGIC contribute 50%, and gave judgment in Steele's favour.

The Appeal

  • Counsel for SGIC submitted on appeal that a contract was entered into between Steele and HCSL, and that it was a contract of insurance, namely, a contract of liability insurance. SGIC argued that this was so as the three requirements for such a contact were present:
  1. there was an agreement, for consideration, to provide a benefit upon the happening of an event;
  2. there was uncertainty as to whether or not the event would occur at all, and as to the time at which it might happen; and
  3. the insured was at risk of suffering a loss.
  • SGIC argued that there was a contract, that there was an uncertain event and that, when Steele and HCSL entered into their contract, Steele was at risk of suffering a loss, that is, the imposition of liability in respect of the incident.
  • In characterising the payments made under the Scheme, the Court of Appeal disagreed with the trial judge and did not accept that such payments were a merciful benefit, or a payment akin to social security payments. Instead, the Court of Appeal considered that the payments, when made to a successful litigant, constituted an indemnification of Steele. The effect of the HCSL payments was to indemnify Steele against his liability in the NSW proceeding. Payments made in return for such assignment would seem to be of little if any value if they were simply made ex gratia, and other than by way of indemnification.
  • Furthermore, the Court of Appeal noted that the Scheme exhibited discretionary features (for example, it picked and chose which classes of HIH policy holders were eligible for benefits). This led to a conclusion that the contract was not a contract of insurance. Even when the discretionary element disappeared when a contract was concluded by the making of a payment, there still remained an element of uncertainty and discretion in that the Commonwealth reserved the right to withdraw the Scheme at any time.
  • With regards to the necessary consideration under the insurance contract, Ashley JA doubted that an assignment of rights by Steele should be equated with a premium, which is the usual form of consideration paid for insurance cover.
  • At the highest, Ashley JA in the Court of Appeal thought that the liability of HCSL was co-ordinate with the liability of SGIC (in other words, there was a situation of dual insurance), and, in those circumstances, HCSL should have brought a proceeding seeking contribution. It followed, then, that Steele could not sue SGIC seeking indemnification in respect of the amounts paid on his behalf in the NSW proceeding. Nor could HCSL sue to recoup its payments in a stand alone proceeding against SGIC.
  • Because the Court of Appeal concluded that the payments made by HCSL were an indemnification of Steele against his liability in the NSW proceeding, it followed that Steele could not obtain indemnification by SGIC in this proceeding, whether he was treated as suing in his own right or in some way for the benefit of HCSL. Nor could HCSL recover from SGIC the indemnity paid by it for Steele. At best, HCSL could recover equitable contribution from SGIC.
  • SGIC was therefore relieved from any obligation to indemnify Steele under the SGIC policy because of the payment made by HCSL. Once HCSL accepted Steele's offer to assign his relevant rights to it by effectively paying 90% of the NSW judgment debt and costs, an enforceable contract came into existence between the 2 parties. The Court of Appeal agreed with the trial judge that that contract could not be characterised as a contract of insurance.
  • The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge in the Victorian proceedings was correct to allow the HIH claim for equitable contribution between HIH and SGIC. They accordingly upheld the trial judge's order for payment by SGIC of contribution, and allowed the appeal.


  • Although Steele was seeking indemnification from SGIC in these proceedings, the case illustrates the practicalities involved in a situation of dual insurance as the Court of Appeal held that was in fact the situation which applied here.
  • The principles of dual insurance can often be complex. In dealing with the position where two legally-enforceable policies cover the same interest against the same loss, the Court of Appeal's judgment indicates that co-ordinate insurers can be required to contribute to the same liability. As should have been the case here, an insurer who pays out an insured's loss can seek contribution from other insurers.
  • The case also indicates that principles of equity and fairness are involved with regard to contribution between insurers. Such considerations are often difficult to apply when dealing with two insurance policies which, although they may cover the same risk, might have different terms and premiums. The Court of Appeal, in this case, upheld a 50/50 contribution, reflecting the extent to which both insurers were seen to be liable. Such considerations do not necessarily reflect the number of insurance contracts involved, but rather will look at the number of insurers involved and the nature of the liability insured under each policy. A 50/50 split is generally applicable where the liability of both insurers is unlimited.
  • A practical implication which is highlighted by this case, although not specifically referred to by the Court of Appeal, is that often insurers, and the insured, may not be aware that a situation of dual insurance exists. In this case, SGIC was required to contribute to the liability as the Australian Grand Prix Corporation had an insurance policy which extended to contractors and sub-contractors. In the absence of exclusion clauses and special provisions, dual insurance will exist and both insurers may be held liable to contribute.
  • Furthermore, where dual insurance exists, and insured is not entitled to seek indemnity from an insurer once he had already been indemnified for the same risk by a co-insurer. This highlights the need for insurers to be conscious of the possibility of dual insurance existing at the outset so that, should they need to call on an insurance policy, the appropriate proceedings can be issued seeking contribution from a co-insurer.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

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”

Mondaq Advice Centre (MACs)
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). 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 & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd 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 or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.