Category Legal Affairs

‘Fraudulent devices’

20 September 2018 Patrick Bracher, Norton Rose Fulbright

The English Supreme Court had the following to say regarding the standard insurance policy fraud clause which excludes liability if the insured makes a claim ‘by fraudulent devices’. The court said:

‘The expression is borrowed from a standard clause avoiding contracts of fire insurance which was widely used in the 19th and early 20th Centuries. But it is archaic and hardly describes the problem.’

The standard South Africa multi-peril policy clause refers to ‘fraudulent means and devices’. It is not at all clear what the word ‘devices’ refers to or why it is necessary at all in addition to ‘fraudulent means’.

The case is Versloot Dredging BV v HDI Gerling Industrie Versicherung.

First published by Financial Institutions Legal Snapshot.

Quick Polls


In navigating the dynamic landscape of financial intermediaries in 2024, which strategy do you believe is most crucial for success?


Prioritising client needs
Embracing technological advancements
Staying abreast of regulatory developments
All of the above
fanews magazine
FAnews February 2024 Get the latest issue of FAnews

This month's headlines

On the insurance industry’s radar in 2024
Insurers, risk managers unsure of AI’s judgement credentials
Is offshore the place to be in 2024?
Gap claims: erosion of medical benefits, soaring specialist fees
Investments and retirement… is conventional wisdom under threat?
Subscribe now