Mataracy
VIP Contributor
By mentioning ingredients one can deduce that certain things must be in force before insurable interest can be present. These are:
(1) There must be property (subject matter of insurance) which is capable of being insured. The property could be motor vehicle , house, shop, liability to others, health etc.
(2) Such property must be the subject matter of insurance.
(3) The insured must be in some reasonable relationship with the subject matter of insurance qhere by he stands to benefit from its continued existence and prejudiced or suffer as a result of any damage or destruction to the property.
(4) The relationship between the insured and the subject matter of insurance must be recognized at law. For example in Nigeria; This was prove in the case of Macaura v Northern Assurance company (1925) . Mr. Macaura effected a fire policy on an amount of cut timber on his estate. He had sold the timber to one man company of which he was the only shareholder. Some of the timber were destroyed in a fire and the insurer refused to meet the claim on the basis that Mr. macaura had no insurable interest in the asset of the company which he was the principal shareholder. The company is a separate legal entity from its shareholders and what was being established by case was that the relationship between the timber and Mr. macaura, whereby Mr.Macaura stood to lose by its destruction, had to be one recognized or enforceable at law.
(1) There must be property (subject matter of insurance) which is capable of being insured. The property could be motor vehicle , house, shop, liability to others, health etc.
(2) Such property must be the subject matter of insurance.
(3) The insured must be in some reasonable relationship with the subject matter of insurance qhere by he stands to benefit from its continued existence and prejudiced or suffer as a result of any damage or destruction to the property.
(4) The relationship between the insured and the subject matter of insurance must be recognized at law. For example in Nigeria; This was prove in the case of Macaura v Northern Assurance company (1925) . Mr. Macaura effected a fire policy on an amount of cut timber on his estate. He had sold the timber to one man company of which he was the only shareholder. Some of the timber were destroyed in a fire and the insurer refused to meet the claim on the basis that Mr. macaura had no insurable interest in the asset of the company which he was the principal shareholder. The company is a separate legal entity from its shareholders and what was being established by case was that the relationship between the timber and Mr. macaura, whereby Mr.Macaura stood to lose by its destruction, had to be one recognized or enforceable at law.
