Insurance Law Monthly

The Christchurch earthquakes of 2010 and 2011 have generated a mass of cases both on the measure of indemnity as a matter of common law and on the proper interpretation of policy wordings. Three factors have combined to complicate the issues. First, outside marine insurance, there is almost no authority on the proper approach to successive losses in the same policy year, where those losses culminate in a total loss following the assured having sustained damage which has not been repaired.

It is trite law that, in order to substantiate a claim under an insurance policy, the assured bears the burden of proving that there has been a loss and that the loss was proximately caused by an insured peril. It is no part of the assured's obligation to show that the loss was fortuitous. Thereafter, the insurers will have to pay unless they can satisfy the burden of proving a defence under the policy.