Insurer's liability under concurrent causation: English law and Chinese law compared

Liang Zhao

doi:10.1017/lst.2021.31

Abstract

AbstractThis paper examines the different regimes of insurer liability under concurrent causation in English law and Chinese law. The analysis shows that neither English law nor Chinese law is satisfactory in terms of the insurer's liability in such cases. It is argued that only one proximate cause should be identified among multiple causes except in the circumstance where an excluded risk and an insured risk concurrently and independently cause a loss of the subject matter insured. Under this exception, the liability in apportionment approach might be an appropriate solution to the question of the insurer's liability under concurrent causation. This approach, however, is not suggested for concurrent causation where an uninsured risk is one of the proximate causes.

Highlights

Causation is a general principle of insurance law under which an insurer will only be liable for a loss proximately caused by a risk covered by an insurance policy
This paper examines the different regimes of insurer liability under concurrent causation in English law and Chinese law
It is argued that only one proximate cause should be identified among multiple causes except in the circumstance where an excluded risk and an insured risk concurrently and independently cause a loss of the subject matter insured

Summary

Introduction

Causation is a general principle of insurance law under which an insurer will only be liable for a loss proximately caused by a risk covered by an insurance policy. The insurer’s liability under concurrent causation in Chinese law is determined according to the potency of the insured risks on the loss of the subject matter insured.

Results

Conclusion