PMB Australia Ltd v MMI General Insurance Ltd & Ors [2002] QCA 361
[2002] QCA 361
Court of Appeal (Qld)|2002-09-20|Before: de Jersey CJ, Jerrard JA and White JSeparate, reasons for each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made
de Jersey CJ, Jerrard JA and White JSeparate, reasons for each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made
Catchwords
INSURANCE – POLICIES OF INSURANCE – CONSTRUCTION OF POLICY
– risks insured – doctrine of proximate cause
– infectious
disease extension to business interruption policy – where trial judge
Source
Original judgment source is linked above.
Catchwords
INSURANCE – POLICIES OF INSURANCE – CONSTRUCTION OF POLICY– risks insured – doctrine of proximate cause– infectiousdisease extension to business interruption policy – where trial judgefound that the proximate cause appliesto whether interruption of business iscaused by insured event and whether loss results from that interruption –whether thelearned trial judge’s construction correctINSURANCE– BUSINESS INTERRUPTION - DOCTRINE OF PROXIMATE CAUSE – CONCURRENTCAUSES INSURANCE – BUSINESS INTERRUPTION– salmonella contaminationof processed peanut product – whether concurrent causes of businessinterruption – extentto which interruption to business was proximatelycaused by salmonella outbreak – whether alterations made to plant andprocessescaused by salmonella outbreak or the need to address the risk ofsalmonella contamination in the future – where “newawareness’
of the risk of contamination should be regarded as a cause of the
lossAPPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL – INTERFERENCE WITH
DISCRETION OF COURT BELOW – whether the learned trial judge was
correct in
confining the appellant to an indemnity for losses referable to the salmonella
outbreak alone – whether the learned
trial judge was correct in concluding
the onus fell in that respect on the appellantINSURANCE – BUSINESS
INTERRUPTION – PROXIMATE CAUSES – quantification of loss –
evidentiary burden –
assessment of loss by court where quantification
difficultINSURANCE – BUSINESS INTERRUPTION –
characterisation of expenses claimed – whether incurred as a consequence
of
interruption to business as a result of insured cause – whether costs
of mitigating loss recoverableAustralian Casualty Co Ltd v Federico
(1986) 160 CLR 513, appliedDirector-General of Social Services v
Hangan (1982) 70FLR 213, consideredHall Brothers Steamship Co Ltd
v Young [1939] 1 KB 748, appliedHenville v Walker [2001] HCA 52
(2001) 182 ALR
37, consideredHIH Casualty & General Insurance Ltd v
WaterwellShipping Inc [1998] NSWSC 436
(1998) 43 NSWLR 601, appliedIonides
v The Universal Marine Insurance Co (1863) 14CB(NS) 259,
appliedJJ Lloyd Investments Ltd v Northern Star Insurance Co
Ltd("Miss Jay Jay") [1987] 1 Lloyd's Rep 32,
appliedLeyland Shipping Company Ltd v Norwich Union
FireInsurance Society Ltd [1918] AC 350, appliedMcIntosh v
Commissioner of Taxation [1978] Qd R 354, consideredPurkess v
INSURANCE - POLICIES OF INSURANCE - CONSTRUCTION OF POLICY - risks insured - doctrine of proximate cause - infectious disease extension to business interruption policy - where trial judge found that the proximate cause applies to whether interruption of business is caused by insured event and whether loss results from that interruption - whether the learned trial judge's construction correct
[2]
INSURANCE - BUSINESS INTERRUPTION - DOCTRINE OF PROXIMATE CAUSE - CONCURRENT CAUSES INSURANCE - BUSINESS INTERRUPTION - salmonella contamination of processed peanut product - whether concurrent causes of business interruption - extent to which interruption to business was proximately caused by salmonella outbreak - whether alterations made to plant and processes caused by salmonella outbreak or the need to address the risk of salmonella contamination in the future - where "new awareness' of the risk of contamination should be regarded as a cause of the loss
[3]
APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - APPEAL - INTERFERENCE WITH DISCRETION OF COURT BELOW - whether the learned trial judge was correct in confining the appellant to an indemnity for losses referable to the salmonella outbreak alone - whether the learned trial judge was correct in concluding the onus fell in that respect on the appellant
[4]
INSURANCE - BUSINESS INTERRUPTION - PROXIMATE CAUSES - quantification of loss - evidentiary burden - assessment of loss by court where quantification difficult
[5]
INSURANCE - BUSINESS INTERRUPTION - characterisation of expenses claimed - whether incurred as a consequence of interruption to business as a result of insured cause - whether costs of mitigating loss recoverable