A Collection is a selection of features, articles, comments and opinions on any given theme or topic. It allows you to stay up‑to‑date with what interests you most.
Login here to access your saved articles and followed authors.
We have sent you an email so you can reset your password.
Sorry, we had a problem.
Tags related to this article
Published 20 July 2022
The importance of the premium payment for the insurance coverage to be effective has been widely discussed. Not only is it an essential value for the business, since the totality of the premiums make up a fund used by the insurer to face the payments arising from the insurance contracts, but also these payments constitute the main obligation for the insured. The non-existence of an insurance contract leads to the possibility, for the insurer, of opposing the defense against the insured for the lack of legal standing.
This was the outcome arrived on the case "Cardozo, Pelegrina del Valle v. Belgrano Cargas S.A. and/or other and/or whoever may be liable for damages", in which the Supreme Court of Justice considered the insurer's position to be admissible due to the non-existence of the insurance contract. At the date of the loss, the contract between the insured and the insurer had been voided due to lack of payment by the insured. "... it is not appropriate to condemn the insurer for non-compliance with a charge when the contractual framework for it ceased to exist...". It is convenient to emphasize that the court makes special emphasis on the fact that the lack of payment of the insurance by the insured, constituting the insured in default, extinguishes the reason to condemn the insurance company.
Having said this, the court solved that in the case under analysis not only had the policy been suspended for the abovementioned reason, but also the contract had been voided prior to the loss.
Juan Diego Arango
Sascha Stullenberg, Andrés Amunátegui Echeverría
Andrés Amunátegui Echeverría, Sascha Stullenberg