Search results

Insurance in Malta has been very largely influenced by English practice and law. The influence of the English market insurance practice and law not only shaped the Maltese market but practically that of all common law jurisdictions in former members of the British empire. Since the London insurance market continues to be a very dominant force globally until today, the connection has undoubtedly served Malta well.

The origins of UK insurance principles of utmost good faith and insurable interest under contract law, date back to times which were very different from today and the need to revise the laws has now been felt in the UK as well as in other jurisdictions which were influenced by its law and practice. In Malta, minimal legislative intervention and the Maltese courts were and continue to be mostly guided by English case law, some of which has now been superseded by the updated statute law which was recently introduced in the UK by virtue of the Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act (2012) and Insurance Act (2015).

We herein lay out a case study of the development of utmost good faith and insurable interest in insurance contracts within the Maltese legal context, based on empirical literature findings and semi-structured interviews together with several legal experts who are specialized in the field and experienced insurance professionals.

The purpose of this paper is to determine and lay out the variables that influence countries to carry out regulatory modernisation of the regulation of the principle of good faith in insurance so as to ensure standardisation of its application and to reduce regulatory asymmetries and uncertainties in the handling of this requirement, given the fast pace of changes in the current ecosystem. Moreover, the authors show whether these variables differ, given the different demographic factors of the respondents participating in this research.

To collect the research data, which consisted of 1,794 valid responses, the authors administered a purposely built survey, which they designed after carrying out and extensive literature search, which yielded 3,248 valid records and resulted in the inclusion of 27 research articles through a scoping review after considering inclusion/exclusion criteria (i.e. the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) search strategy. The authors carried this survey between September 2019 and June 2020 using the social network, verbal and online communication systems. The survey was addressed to persons within insurance associations, professional members, persons within large corporates in the insurance industry and selected experts in the field who were purposely selected based on the work experience held, roles occupied in the industry, qualifications attained and area of expertise. The quantitative data was analysed using statistical tools, specifically descriptive statistics, exploratory factor analysis, Cronbach’s alpha and multiple linear regression. The qualitative data obtained was analysed using the thematic approach.

The authors found that four variables determine the need for modernisation of the principle of utmost good faith requirement, specifically institutional stakeholders and the political-legal framework; the market, consumer influence and the socio-economic environment; socio-technological environment and insurance practice; and international business. Moreover, the authors found that these variables hold relationships with some demographic variables and differ with age, gender, level of education and occupation in a variety of ways.

The statements grouped under the themes determined as influencing factor variables for the need for modernisation of the principle of utmost good faith, can be used by stakeholders such as policymakers and reformists within countries as a measure to determine whether this regulatory requirement is in need of modernisation or it can be used as a model for determining modernisation of other regulations or for the development of other similar models. Moreover, scholars may use this model for other sectors and other regulatory frameworks in different jurisdictions.

Although, the authors have noted several articles about modernisation carried out on regulations, to the best of their knowledge, they have not encountered articles that capture the influencing factor variables for the need for modernisation of the principle of utmost good faith under a group of themes.

Insurance is a dynamic business highly affected by the environment it operates in. Alongside the practice of insurance, come principles on which the business of insurance is based. One of the principles, that is not short of controversy, is the doctrine of utmost good faith which requires full disclosure of material facts by the contracting parties. The author, in this chapter, explored the need for change in the regulation of this insurance principle and discussed the drivers behind these changes and the commensurate effect on the practice of insurance. The author delved into case studies, practices and literature and traced back to the origins of the long-standing principle of utmost good faith. This principle is one on which the acceptance (or otherwise) and premium of an insurance contract is based and through which certain factors and developments in the industry have led to a major reform in some jurisdiction.

The author discussed the development and drivers leading to reform and concluded that reform is ultimately the result of public outcry, through individual cases heard predominantly in court, a well-established reform committee, the socio-political environment of that country and the advent of technology. Moreover, although, different countries have their own jurisdictions, laws and regulations as well as market practices and international trade have made it imperative to have common technical practices between market players especially in insurance, which depends on the spread of risks between countries internationally. Smooth insurance business can only be established if this reform is harmonised between jurisdictions.

The purpose of this paper is to look at auditor obligations to their clients and potentially to third parties such as investors, with a focus on the quality of financial disclosure in an evolving legal framework.

The article outlines and compares established and emerging trends relative to information disclosure and contractual performance in parallel contexts where information asymmetry exists. In particular, this article considers the disclosure regime that has evolved in the insurance industry to address the substantial imbalance in the level of knowledge possessed by the insured in comparison to the prospective insurer. Abductive reasoning is used to identify causal constructs that explain the data pattern from which the theorised potential for judicial revision of the interpretation of “true and fair” in line with “good faith” in legal regulation is derived.

The authors conclude that there is little doubt that a duty of good faith in relation to auditor-company contractual dealings and potentially a broader good faith duty to third parties such as investors in companies may be on the horizon.

In the context of stated objectives by organisations such as the International Federation of Accountants to reconcile ethical and technical skills in the wake of the global financial crisis, there is an increased need to rebuild public and investor confidence in the underpinning integrity of financial reporting. This paper offers a perspective on one way to achieve this by recognising the similarities in the information asymmetry relationships in the insurance industry and how the notion of “good faith” in that relationship could be useful in the audit situation.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a critical examination of the current law and the proposed changes made by the Law Commission, after consultation, in relation to non‐fraudulent pre‐contractual duties in insurance law.

The research is addressed using case law, statutes, current academic and law commission publications in the UK and Australia.

First, the paper finds that the current state of the law is unfair in relation to consumers and small businesses and much reform is needed to rebalance the nature of insurance contracts to reflect modern day practice.

This work does not address detailed issues in relation to fraudulent misrepresentations.

The law will be brought into line with current practice by the Financial Ombudsman Service.

This paper will be of interest to legal practitioners and academics and those in the insurance industry.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a critical examination of the current law and the possible changes that are under consideration by the Law Commissions, after public consultation in relation to the continuing duty of good faith and post‐contractual duties owed by the insured towards the insurer.

The research is addressed using case law, statutes, current academic and Law Commissions publications in the UK.

First, the paper finds that the current state of the law allows for the insurer to claim damages from an insured when a fraudulent claim is made to recover the cost of any investigations. Second the insurer can refuse to meet a claim that is tainted by fraud. Third the insurer can have the right to avoid the policy obligations upon the discovery of a fraud, but subject to some limitations. Fourth there is a need for the insured to be protected against an insurer's unjustified allegations of fraud.

This work does not address detailed issues in relation to pre‐contractual issues of good faith. These have been discussed in a previous edition of this journal see Swaby. G. (2010) “Insurance law: fit for purpose in the twenty‐first century?” IJLMA, 52 (1), pp. 21‐39. ISSN 1754‐243X.

The Law Commission will be undertaking further consultations before reforming this area of law.

This paper will be of interest to legal practitioners and academics and those in the insurance industry.

The purpose of this paper is to consider the present and possible future nature of the legal regime regulating and seeking to control fraud and corruption on the part of directors and officers of companies in the UK.

This paper outlines aspects in the present and future fight against fraud and corruption on the part of directors and officers of companies, particularly with regard to public and listed companies in the UK.

The paper emphasises the need for the UK Government to secure adequate resources for the investigating and enforcement authorities to ensure that the law of fraud and corruption is effectively enforced, rather than pursue a policy of constant enactment of new legislation which is increasingly complex and ineffective.

The paper considers the creation of a new generic offence to supplement the new generic offences created under the Fraud Act 2006, based on the established principle of the fiduciary duty, a duty owed by all directors and officers to their companies. These offences could form the central core of a future legal regime regulating the conduct of directors and officers.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the recent codification of the duties of nominee directors in Malaysia.

Comparative law and legal theory.

The paper finds that the Malaysian approach to the duties of nominee directors is overly prescriptive and inconsistent with commercial reality.

A review of the law on the duties of nominee directors in Malaysia is called for.

This paper highlights the need for clear law reform objectives and made comparisons of the law across jurisdictions.