CLAIM FOR INSURANCE.

Otago Witness, Issue 3775, 20 July 1926, Page 36

CLAIM FOR INSURANCE.

AMBIGUITY OF POLICY. JUDGMENT AGAINST COMPANY. AUCKLAND, July 13. Mr Justice Stringer gave judgment for the full amount in an action for the recovery of £49 14s 3d due on an insurance policy, brought by Albert Edward Braund against the Mutual Life and Citizens’ Assurance Company. Plaintiff was a mechanical engineer, and took out a combined life and accident policy of £IOO on October 10. When disconnecting a crank shaft on May 29 he suffered an injury which developed into hernia, for which he claimed compensation. The company denied liability. Plaintiff alleged that the policy issued by the company departed from the proposal by introducing fresh terms, but made no claim for rectification of the policy. At the hearing, however, said His Honor, he made the amendment by adding a claim for rectification of policy to make it conform with the proposal with regard to Injuries by accident. The defence was: First, that there was no liability under the policy; secondly, that notice of the accident was not given forthwith, but, there being no doubt that the claim was perfectly genuine, -Dne technical defence was very properly withdrawn. One condition of the policy was that the company was not liable “for hernia, however caused.” This provision contained 30 lines of exceedingly small print, most difficult to read, and the enumeration of a great variety of accidents In respect to which the company exempted itself from liability. These were an entire departure from the proposal, which contained no intimation of any such exemptions, and purported to cover accidents generally; and it was so understood by the plaintiff. His Honor was satisfied of the truth of plaintiff’s statement that he did not know the meaning of the word hernia. If he had read the clause in question he would not have understood its effect in limiting his rights under the assurance. It was the duty of companies to make a policy accord with, and not exceed, the proposal, and to express both in .clear and unambiguous termß. The policy would be rectified as “before-mentioned, and on such rectification plaintiff was entitled to the amount claimed, with costs on the lowest scale, and witnesses's expenses and disbursements.