In " Commercial Union v Lotter ", the court held that the fact that the insured vehicle was a stolen vehicle compromised the appellant's right of subrogation.
2.
It promotes the concept of insurance companies as a substitute for government as the institution used to pursue claims; in the event a person were defrauded, they could file a claim with their insurance company, and the insurer would obtain the right of subrogation.
3.
In some cases, the principal has a cause of action against another party for the principal's loss, and the surety will have a right of subrogation " step into the shoes of " the principal and recover damages to make up for the payment to the principal.
4.
As is true for homeowners today, everyone would be responsible for buying or otherwise being covered by aggression insurance in order to protect themselves against catastrophic loss from foreign attack; in the event of an invasion, a claim would be filed with right of subrogation, and the insurer would hire a private defense company to collect from the aggressor.
5.
In a case such as the present, however, where the insured vehicle was a stolen one, an action instituted by Commercial Union ( against a negligent third party who had damaged the vehicle ) could be successfully resisted on the basis that Lotter ( and thus Commercial Union under its right of subrogation ) had no title in the vehicle.
6.
The insurance company argued that its right of subrogation was diminished by the fact that the vehicle in question was a stolen vehicle when the insurance policy was taken out : The insured had no title to the vehicle, so the insurance company could not sue a negligent third party, in terms of its right of subrogation, for the full costs of repairing any damage to the vehicle.
7.
The insurance company argued that its right of subrogation was diminished by the fact that the vehicle in question was a stolen vehicle when the insurance policy was taken out : The insured had no title to the vehicle, so the insurance company could not sue a negligent third party, in terms of its right of subrogation, for the full costs of repairing any damage to the vehicle.
8.
If the surety is required to pay or perform due to the principal's failure to do so, the law will usually give the surety a right of subrogation, allowing the surety to " step into the shoes of " the principal and use his ( the surety's ) contractual rights to recover the cost of making payment or performing on the principal's behalf, even in the absence of an express agreement to that effect between the surety and the principal.
मोबाइल