Revisiting concurrent causation and principles in English insurance law: a legal fiction?
Revisiting concurrent causation and principles in English insurance law: a legal fiction?
This article poses and discusses the question: are the concept and principles of concurrent causes in English insurance law essentially valid, or simply a legal fiction? This article addresses the question from two aspects. First, while concurrent causation in itself is a real concept in insurance contract law, it is often difficult to ascertain in fact and define in law. As for the other aspect, this article suggests that the central cases of Wayne Tank and The Miss Jay Jay have long been misinterpreted by insurance lawyers as having broadly laid down concurrent causes principles in English insurance law. Even following the Supreme Court’s adoption, in the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) COVID-19 business interruption insurance test case, of a principled application of the doctrine of concurrent causes, concurrent causation remains a largely theoretical analysis, as applied by the English courts. It is submitted that a judicial reinterpretation of both Wayne Tank and The Miss Jay Jay is overdue, and that the focus should be on the interplay of causation and interpretation in the determination of insurance indemnity, no longer referring to the two cases as establishing legal principles of causation.
457-474
Song, Meixian
95735514-86ff-4387-aecb-9f708549047a
30 July 2021
Song, Meixian
95735514-86ff-4387-aecb-9f708549047a
Song, Meixian
(2021)
Revisiting concurrent causation and principles in English insurance law: a legal fiction?
Journal of Business Law, 2021 (6), .
Abstract
This article poses and discusses the question: are the concept and principles of concurrent causes in English insurance law essentially valid, or simply a legal fiction? This article addresses the question from two aspects. First, while concurrent causation in itself is a real concept in insurance contract law, it is often difficult to ascertain in fact and define in law. As for the other aspect, this article suggests that the central cases of Wayne Tank and The Miss Jay Jay have long been misinterpreted by insurance lawyers as having broadly laid down concurrent causes principles in English insurance law. Even following the Supreme Court’s adoption, in the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) COVID-19 business interruption insurance test case, of a principled application of the doctrine of concurrent causes, concurrent causation remains a largely theoretical analysis, as applied by the English courts. It is submitted that a judicial reinterpretation of both Wayne Tank and The Miss Jay Jay is overdue, and that the focus should be on the interplay of causation and interpretation in the determination of insurance indemnity, no longer referring to the two cases as establishing legal principles of causation.
Text
2021_JBL_6_Art_1_Song Pure
- Accepted Manuscript
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 30 June 2021
Published date: 30 July 2021
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 451508
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/451508
ISSN: 0021-9460
PURE UUID: 81973a10-e85c-4cfd-9085-c57fd94e948e
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 05 Oct 2021 16:30
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 06:45
Export record
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics