|
Uberrimae
Fidae vs. Self-Destruction Mens Rea: Contextualization
of `Moral Hazard Concept' in Life Insurance Contracts
-- Madabhushi Sridhar
The
enforceability and legality of a life insurance contract is
governed by the concept of uberrimae fidae, the principle
of public policy and insured acts of self-destruction in sane
and guilty conditions. Due to the peculiar legal status of
`suicide' in criminal law, its impact on the life insurance
contracts is very complex and at the same time very interesting
too. The paper traces the evolution of the principle of moral
hazard in a life insurance contract and its gradual dilution
with the changing style of human civilization and understanding
the influence of `criminal' acts on the civil contract. The
development of law in the UK and judicial decisions in India
on the point offer a fascinating comparison and the modified
legal position in Australia presents a practical approach
to the problem. The study reaches a logical conclusion that
the principle of moral hazard plays a reduced role in a life
insurance contract with reference to suicide and that the
terms of the contract should prevail over to fix the liability
of the insurer to fulfil the purpose and objective of a life
insurance contract that is to help the dependents to absorb
the shock of sudden death of the insured, either by natural
or suicidal death, in sane or insane conditions.
©
2008 Madabhushi Sridhar. All Rights Reserved.
Disclosures
and Concealments: Legitimate Reflections on Insurance Contracts
-- A V Narsimha Rao
The
insurance contracts are the contracts of good faith. The parties
to the contracts, the insurer and the insured are bound to
act with good faith and make disclosures about the risks that
are covered under the policies and other related matters.
The obligation to be fair and true will continue throughout
the contract. The insurer designs the proposal forms and questions
to get the required information from the insured. The insured
has an obligation to answer the questions with good faith
and should not conceal any information which is relevant or
which influences the decision of the insurer. Similarly, the
insurer has a responsibility to provide the information relating
to the insurance product they sell and the claims settlement.
Non-disclosure of the information or disclosing the wrong
information may amount to concealment. The concealment of
information with a bad intention may result in misrepresentations
and fraud which can be a ground to avoid the contract.
©
2008 The Icfai University Press. All Rights Reserved.
State
Regulation and Consumer Protection in the Insurance Industry
-- Sharon Tennyson
There
is an ongoing debate about the regulatory role of states on
insurance markets with special reference to the consumer protection.
In recent debates, at different levels of the government,
opponents of federal role have raised their concern about
protection of consumers at market place in view of proposed
deregulation of insurance business. This paper analyzes the
need for market conduct regulation in insurance markets, and
argues for state versus federal provisions and regulation.
The paper examines the provision of consumer protection regulation
by the states in light of proposals for an increased federal
role in insurance regulation.
©
2008 Indiana State University and Networks Financial Institute.
This paper was earlier published in the Networks Financial
Institute's Policy Brief. Reprinted with permission.
The
Role of Ambiguity in Insurance Policy Interpretation --
Jeffrey E Thomas
The
Doctrine of contra proferentum plays a vital role in the interpretation
of insurance policies more particularly where there is an
ambiguity in the terms of the policy. The doctrine explains
that whenever there is an ambiguity in the policy, it has
to be read for the benefit of the insured. Courts have supported
this view and pronounced judgments in many cases. The ambiguity
may be related to a question of law. The courts have to interprit
the policies by themselves in the light of other evidences.
This paper makes an attempt to explain the intricacies of
the doctrine with the help of decided cases of various courts
of USA.
©
2006 Matthew Bender and Company, Inc., A Member of the LexisNexis
Group. This article was earlier published in New Appleman
on Insurance: Current Critical Issues in Insurance Law.
Reprinted with permission.
|
