Double insurance – stroke of genius or waste of money?

We all know that insurance is there to provide relief from an uncertain event that could arise and cause damage to your property. But, can you insure for example your car with two insurers and should your car be written off in an accident claim for and receive double compensation from two insurers for the same accident? You have after all paid them both the required insurance premiums.

Insurance companies have been in the spotlight over the last two years, with incidents emanating from the Covid-19 pandemic relating to business interruption as well as claims following the July 2021 looting and the 2022 KwaZulu-Natal floods affecting the insurance industry and putting a spotlight on insurance practices.

As a result of this it has come to light that many individuals and businesses in South Africa have taken out double insurance. Double insurance occurs when an insured (an individual or business) insures the same interest and/or property with more than one insurance company against the same risk. This means that double insurance is established by the following: two insurance policies must exist which insure the insured for the same incident, both policies must insure the same property and/or interest and both policies must be active when the insurable event arises. 

But is double insurance allowed?

In the case of Samancor Limited v Mutual & Federal Insurance Company Limited and Others the Supreme Court of Appeal held that although an insured can take out double insurance the insured is not entitled to double compensation as an insured is only entitled to actual damages suffered. The insured thus has the option of electing which insurer to claim from. An insured can therefore opt to claim the entire loss from the one insurer or the insured can claim from each of the insurers a pro-rata share but jointly only to the value of the actual total damage suffered. Interestingly, where there is double insurance and one insurer has settled a claim in full such insurer may have recourse against the second insurer for their pro-rata share of the damage according to the principle of contribution. 

In cases of contribution, the requirements for contribution are that the insurer who claims for contribution must have settled an insured’s claim in full, the insurer must have paid more than their pro-rata share, the settlement should have related to an insured interest and/or property that was subject to double insurance and the double insurance must be more than the amount of the insured loss.

Insurance policies often contain clauses that make provision for double insurance and contribution. In the Samancor case, the Court found that the principle of contribution is an equitable remedy and not derived from any contractual relationship between co-insurers.  

So yes, double insurance is allowed, enabling the insured to claim all of the damages or in part from the different insurers, and the insurers can claim for contribution between each other. What is not allowed, is for the insurer to claim for double his damage because he has double the insurance. Our law of insurance is that insurance is there to make you whole should you suffer damage, but not to provide you with a windfall where you get more back than what you lost. It is also for this reason that the fact of double insurance must be disclosed to your insurers and would most insurance contracts require such disclosure of you when placing the policy.

Disclaimer: This article is the personal opinion/view of the author(s) and is not necessarily that of the firm. The content is provided for information only and should not be seen as an exact or complete exposition of the law. Accordingly, no reliance should be placed on the content for any reason whatsoever and no action should be taken on the basis thereof unless its application and accuracy has been confirmed by a legal advisor. The firm and author(s) cannot be held liable for any prejudice or damage resulting from action taken on the basis of this content without further written confirmation by the author(s). 

July 15, 2022
Section 8C explained: Tax tips for employee share schemes

Section 8C explained: Tax tips for employee share schemes

Employee share schemes are often introduced to reward, retain, or align employees with long-term business growth. However, under section 8C of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 (the “Income Tax Act”), these arrangements can create significant and unexpected tax liabilities for employees when equity instruments vest. This article explains how section 8C operates, what qualifies as an “equity instrument,” and why careful structuring of share schemes is essential to avoid punitive tax outcomes.

The costly consequences of backdated share transactions

The costly consequences of backdated share transactions

The South African legislative framework regards backdated shares as a suspicious and illegal practice, as it arises when a share issue or transfer is recorded as having occurred on an earlier date than the actual transaction. While backdating may be viewed as an administrative oversight, the consequences may constitute compliance risk, serious misconduct on directors, beneficial owners and compliance officers who authorise the backdating of share transactions. This is because backdated shares may manipulate the timing of funds, obscure the source of funds, and distort a company’s beneficial ownership structure.

Tax transparency matters: Are your deals reportable?

Tax transparency matters: Are your deals reportable?

Some deals come with hidden reporting duties. Find out when your transactions could trigger SARS disclosure rules, and how to stay compliant. You may have heard the term “reportable arrangement” in tax conversations around commercial transactions. It sounds technical, and it is, but at its core, it’s about transparency. The South African Revenue Service (“SARS”) seeks information on certain transactions that could be used to avoid or reduce tax. If you enter a reportable arrangement, you may be legally required to report it. Failure to comply can result in significant penalties.

Sign up to our newsletter

Pin It on Pinterest