![CA-2024-000950 - [2025] EWCA Civ 1019](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_Sjvxvlx.png){kind=logo}
The Respondents’ Notice
The Respondents’ Notice
The respondents submitted that the judge’s decision could if necessary be upheld on the following additional grounds:
the charges against Mr Bairactaris were not material;
the insurers were not induced to enter into the contract by the alleged non-disclosure at all;
the insurers affirmed the contract; and
the policy was a composite policy, so that any breach of the duty of fair presentation by one insured did not prejudice the rights of other insureds who were not in breach of that duty.
In view of the conclusions already reached, it is unnecessary to decide the issues raised by this Respondents’ Notice and I do not propose to do so, despite the interesting submissions which we heard, including from Ms Lorraine Aboagye, junior counsel for the appellants.
- Heading
- LORD JUSTICE MALES
- Background
- The reason for the detention of the vessel
- The policy
- Clause 4.1.5 of the English Institute Clauses 1983
- The judgment – exclusion 1(e)
- The appellants’ submissions – exclusion 1(e)
- Analysis – exclusion 1(e)
- Customs regulations
- Quarantine regulations
- ‘Under’ and ‘by reason of the infringement of’
- ‘and similar’
- The duty of fair presentation
- The criminal charges against Mr Bairactaris
- Relevant provisions of the Insurance Act 2015
- Extraneous materials
- The judgment – duty of fair presentation
- The appellants’ submissions – duty of fair presentation
- Analysis – duty of fair presentation
- Ought to know
- Should reasonably have been revealed
- Inducement and remedy
- The Respondents’ Notice
- Conclusions