Court of Appeal

Michail v Australian Alliance Insurance Company Ltd [2014] QCA 138 (13/12151) Margaret McMurdo P and Gotterson JA and Dalton J 6 June 2014

Full-text: QCA14-138.pdf

Catchwords

INSURANCE MOTOR VEHICLES INSURANCE OF MOTOR VEHICLES FOR LOSS OR DAMAGE DISCLOSURE AND MISREPRESENTATION where the appellant claimed against his insurer, the respondent, for the total loss of his car where it was common ground that the appellant had not disclosed his driving history to the respondent where the respondent insurer contended that had the true position been disclosed to it, it would not have insured the risk at all where the appellant contended that the judge below erred in finding that the insurer would not have insured the appellant where the respondent had written guidelines as to whether or not it would accept various risks apparent in proposals it received where the respondent at trial called the person who would likely have considered the appellant's proposal had full disclosure been made where that person's evidence was that neither he nor those at a lower level in the respondent's hierarchy had discretion to accept the appellant's proposal whether the judge below erred

EVIDENCE BURDEN OF PROOF, PRESUMPTIONS, AND WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE GENERALLY CREDIBILITY AND WEIGHT PARTY'S FAILURE TO GIVE OR CALL EVIDENCE where the appellant contends the judge below should have exercised caution in assessing the evidence adduced by the respondent in accordance with the principles in Blatch v Archer where the appellant contended the respondent ought to have called the executive manager of the respondent where the appellant contended the respondent ought to have provided a proper underwriting assessment of the risk which the appellant's proposal posed whether the rule in Blatch v Archer applied