KEEP UP TO DATE WITH ALL THE IMPORTANT COVID-19 INFORMATIONCOVID-19 RESOURCE PORTAL
FANews
FANews
RELATED CATEGORIES
Category Legal Affairs
SUB CATEGORIES General | 

Interpreting insurance contracts (part 6 – objective interpretation)

13 January 2021 Donald Dinnie, Norton Rose Fulbright
Donald Dinnie, Norton Rose Fulbright

Donald Dinnie, Norton Rose Fulbright

The interpretation process is objective, not subjective.

The court cannot substitute what it regards as reasonable, sensible or business-like for the words actually used. The court should not in those circumstances rewrite the contract made by the parties.

Courts should not ‘make a contract for the parties other than the one they in fact made’. See Natal Joint Municipal Pension Fund v Endumini Municipality (SCA).

Have a look at the rest of the posts in our series on interpreting insurance contracts. You can also read more on interpretation of contracts, here.

 

First published by: Financial Institutions Legal Snapshot

Quick Polls

QUESTION

How to give affordable and appropriate financial advice to the low income market segment. There is little room on a R50 pm policy for advisers to be remunerated for the time it would it would take to educate & fulfil admin function. What is the solution?

ANSWER

[a] Eliminate non-advice sales / telesales
[b] Implement industry standards for non-advice information
[c] Introduce an insurer-funded pro-bono advice network to low income earners
[d] Reinforce the Policyholder Protection Rules
fanews magazine
FAnews November 2020 Get the latest issue of FAnews

This month's headlines

Customer experience in the ‘now’ generation
Is our industry a tainted industry?
How to keep brokers out of the firing line
Getting to grips with contractual versus delictual liability
International trusts and tax consequences
The COVID-19 pandemic and medical schemes
Subscribe now