The Nature of Insurer's Liability and its Impact on Selection Method of "Recoupment" and the Principle of Subrogation

Document Type : Scientific research

Authors

• Mohsen Izanloo ¹
• Abolfazl Shahin ²

¹ Associated Professor Private Law at University of Tehran

² Ph.D. Student of Private Law at University of Tehran

https://doi.org/10.22067/le.v27i17.81169

Abstract

Introduction:
One of the ambiguities existing in the insurance contract is the quiddity and nature of the insurer's liability in the insurance contract, which means whether insurer's payments is of the nature of a demand insured or real damage. The nature of the insurer's liability has a direct effect on the possibility of insured's referring to the tortfeasor and on the possibility of accumulating the damage imposer’s liability and insurer's liability (due to differences in origin). In this way, if the nature of the payments that the insurance company pays to the insured or the stakeholder is a credit (or savings or replacement of the contract), the injured party (the insured), after obtaining the insurance money from the insurer pursuant to contract, can refer to the tortfeasor because of the difference in the origin of liability (contractual and forcible) and the responsible person (insurance company and tortfeasor).
Theoretical frame work, Methodology, Results & Discussion:
There are several legal systems to compensate for the insured’s losses, the most important of which include: 1. Selection: This means that the damaged party can refer to one of the responsible agents (insurer or tortfeasor) at his/her own selection. 2. Accumulation of benefits: This system is operative according to the principle of capital and, thereby, the damaged insured can also refer to the contractual legal system in addition to entitlement to refer to the forcible liability. 3. Recoupment: The contractual liability (insurer) can refer to the forcible liability after the loss and damage was compensated for and demand the tortfeasor for compensation for the payment already incurred. 4. Relieving the Tortfeasor’s liability: This means that neither of the parties are entitled to refer to the tortfeasor (Cane, 2006: 377; Lewis, 1998: 17). The principle of subrogation, which has been approved by Iranian legislatures, is a subset of the recoupment system and entails the fact that the insurer should refer to the tortfeasor while the damage was compensated for and amount paid to the insured should be claimed for refund from the tortfeasor.
In domestic law, the principle of subrogation is viewed to be based on the rule of "double compensation prohibition " and "prohibition of unjust ownership" and is interpreted on the basis of recognizing the insurer's payment to the insured as "damages". In other words, when the insurer compensates for the insured's loss by paying for the damages, the insured can no longer refer to the insurer because one of the pillars of the claim is the civil liability of damages survival. Thus, when the insured's damages were paid by the insurer, the insured does not have the right to refer to the tortfeasor but the insurer can refer to the tortfeasor on behalf of him/her (Babaee, 2005: 25; Taheri, 2008: 22). In this research, for the following reasons, it was proved that the nature of the insurer's payment has been a "credit" and the above argument is not correct.
First, according to Article 1 of the Insurance Law in 1937, insurance is a commutative contract and the insurer's indemnity is paid for the insurance premiums paid by the insured. In addition, the insurer's obligation originates from the insurance contract; therefore, the nature of the insurer's liability is contractual credit.
Second, according to Article 30 of the Insurance Law in 1937, when a payment is settled by the insurer, the insurer has the right to refer to the tortfeasor on behalf of the insured. If, according to the well-known theory of nature of compensation in insurance, is assumed to be damage and reference to the tortfeasor entails the rule of "prohibition of double compensation", such a right will not be considered either for his/her subrogation (insurer) because the injured party’s claims are compensated for by the insurer’s compensation and it is not possible any longer to refer to the tortfeasor (originally or by subrogation). As a result, the nature of the insurer's payment should be considered to be based on credit and contract and there should be the possibility of referring to the tortfeasor on behalf of the insured. In other words, knowing the "nature" of the insurer's payment is the requirement for the justification of "principle of subrogation".
Third, at the end of Article 30 of the Insurance Law in 1937, the legislator states that "the insurer will be the subrogation of the insured and if the insured takes any action contrary to the contract, s/he will be considered liable to the insurer". Any action contrary to the insured’s right, such as release from an obligation third party responsible and bringing an action for damage against the third party responsible by the insured (original) is valid when s/he has the right to quittance or initiation of lawsuit. If the nature of the insurer’s liability is damage and the insured has no right against the tortfeasor, how can s/he acquit the tortfeasor or claim any payment from him?
Fourth, in some legal systems, such as the legal systems of the United States and Ireland, the injured party has the possibility to refer both to the operating losses (tortfeasor) and the insurer, and the system of "Collateral Benefits" is applied (English Law Commission's Consultation paper, 1997, No. 147, "Damages for Personal Injury: Collateral Benefits": P 75, At: www.lawcom.gov.uk). This suggests that the principle of subrogation is not due to the nature of damaging the insured's civil liability.
What the insurer pays to the insured is the "credit" of the insured and the enforcement of the contract by the insurer; and the insured’s right to refer to the tortfeasor to receive "indemnity" is retained (which is referred to the tortfeasor by the insured in the "collateral benefits" system or by the insurer in the "recoupment" system on behalf of the insured.
Conclusions & Suggestions:
The nature of the insurer's liability in the insurance contract is demand and contractual. In our law, the "Recoupment" system is chosen on how to refer to the tortfeasor, and the insurer, after being compensated according to the insurance contract for civil liability and to compensate for the power of subrogation from the insured, refers to the tortfeasor. Knowing payment, the "nature" of the insurer's liability, the possibility of applying any of the Selection systems, Accumulation of Benefits, the Recoupment and the Relieving the Tortfeasor’s liability can be applied according to the requirements of time and place. It is suggested that the "Accumulation of Benefits" system be specifically reviewed by the legislator.
 

Keywords

• Allocation of economic risk
• Liability insurance
• Indemnity against liability
• Indemnity against loss
• Right to indemnification

References

[1] Am. Nurses Ass'n v. Passaic Gen. Hosp., 471 A.2d 66-NJ: Appellate Div. (1984).

[2] American States Insurance Company v. Williams, 278 NE 2d 295 - Ind: Court of Appeals, 3rd Dist. (1972).

[3] Amwest Surety Insurance Company v. Cardenas, Dist. Court, ND Texas (2013).

[4] Aubtin, Yann, Portwood, Tim. (2001). "Les clauses rèciproques d'abandon de recours et de garanties contre les recours des tiers". RDAI/IBLJ. (In french).

[5] Austro v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., 66 NY 2d 674 - NY: Court of Appeals (1985).

[6] Bae Systems Land & Armaments, LP v. IBIS TEK, LLC, Dist.Court, Minnesota (2016).

[7] Barb v. Farmers Insurance Exchange, 281 SW 2d 297 - Mo: Supreme Court, 1st Div. (1955).

[8] Barnhizer, Daniel D. (2006). "Power, inequality and the bargain: the role of bargaining power in law of contract - symposium introduction". Michigan state law review, Vol. 2006:841. (In english).

[9] Bond Diamond Company v. Wilson, 325 SW2d 63 - Mo: Court of Appeals, Western Dist. (1959).

[10] Booth, Peter J. (N.D.). "Problems with contractual indemnities and how to avoid them". Victorian bar. (In english).

[11] Buchalter v. Levin, 252 Cal. App. 2d 367 - Cal: Court of Appeal (1967).

[12] Burlington Northern v. C & NW Transp. CO., 851 SW 2d 28 - Mo: Court of Appeals, Western Dist. (1993).

[13] Burgess Const. Co. v. State, 614 P. 2d 1380 - Alaska: Supreme Court (1980).

[14] Burns & McDonnell ENG. v. Torson Const., 834 SW 2d 755 - Mo: Court of Appeals, Western Dist. (1992).

[15] Campbell Black, Henry. (1968). Black's Law Dictionary. fourth edition, Saint Paul, West Publishing Co. (In english).

[16] Canada Steamship Lines LD., v. The King [1952] A.C. 192.

[17] Chitty, Joseph. (2012). Chitty on contracts. Vol. 1, thirty-first edition, Sweet & Maxwell, London, (In english).

[18] Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. Quorum management Corp., 186 F.Supp.3d 1307 - Dist.Court, MD Florida (2016).

[19] Cohen v. Five Brooks Stable, 72 Cal. Rptr.3d471 - Cal: Court of Appeal, 1st Appellate Dist., 2nd Div. (2008).

[20] Cortes v. Town of Brookhaven, 78 AD 3d 642 - NY: Appellate Div., 2nd Dept. (2010).

[21] Cour de cassation, Chambre civile 2, 29 mars 1962, N° 360.

[22] Cour de cassation, 15 avril 1961, Publie au bulletin, N° 275.

[23] Courtney Wayne. (2014). Contractual indemnities. Oxford, Hart Publishing.

[24] Crawford v. Weather Shield Mfg., Inc., 187 P. 3d 424 - Cal: Supreme Court (2008).

[25] CRS Auto Parts, Inc. v. National grange mutual insurance company, Dist. Court, ED Pennsylvania (2008).

[26] Davis v. Commissioner for Main Roads, 117 CLR 529 (1967).

[27] Dayes, Trey. (1996). "Drafting a limited liability clause that will pass the scrutiny of the Utah courts". BYU journal of public law, Vol. 10. (In english).

[28] Denny's Inc. v. Avesta Enterprises, Ltd., 884 SW 2d 281 - Mo: Court of Appeals, Western Dist. (1994).

[29] Devlin, Cathleen M. (1984). "Indemnity and exculpation: Circle of confusion in the courts", Emroy law journal, Vol. 33. (In english).

[30] Duggan Vraa, Paula, Sitektt, Steven M. (2006). "Public policy consideration for exculpatory and indemnification clause: Yang v. Voyagaire houseboats Inc.". William Mitchell law review, Vol. 32:4. (In english).

[31] Esmein, Paul. (1926). Les clauses de non responsabilite, Revue trimestrielle de droit civil. (In french).

[32] Evans, Michael J. (1980). "Exculpation and indemnification agreements in Alabama". Cumberland law review, Vol. 11:183. (In english).

[33] Farstad v. Enviroco [2010] UKSC18.

[34] Financial Casulaty & Surety, Inc. v. Zouvelos, Dist.Court, ED New York (2017).

[35] Firma C-Trade S.A. v. Newcastle Protection and Indemnity Association (The Fanti) 2A.C.1 (1991).

[36] Fontaine, Marcel. (1985). "Les clauses limitative et exoneratoires de responsabilite et de garantie dans les contrats internationaux". R.D.A.I./I.B.L.J. (In french).

[37] Fontaine, Marcel. (2013). "Assurance par un non-assureur - clauses de prise en charge de risques, conventions de garantie et contrat d'assurance". Revue generale de droit civil belge, Vol. 27, No.10. (In french).

[38] Forarbeider, Svenske. (2008). Indemnity and Hold harmless clause, Department of private law, Faculty of law, University of Oslo, (In english).

[39] Garner Brayan A. (2011). "Indemnify". 15 Green bag 2D. (In english).

[40] Gerald T., Wetherington. (1980) "Tort indemnity in Florida", Florida state university law review, Vol. 8. (In english).

[41] Gillespie Bros & Co Ltd v Roy Bowles Transport Ltd [1973].

[42] Goldman v. Ecco-Phoenix Elec. Corp., 62 Cal. 2d 40 - Cal: Supreme Court (1964).

[43] Gosdin, James L. (2007). Title insurance: A comparehensive overview, third edition, Chicago, Section of real peoperty, probate and trust law. (In english).

[44] Great American Insurance Company of New York v. International Custom Products, Inc., Dist. Court, WD Pennsylvania (2011).

[45] Greenwich Millennium Village Ltd v Essex Services Group plc and others [2014] EWCA Civ 960

[46] Gray JR, James C., Catt, Lisa D. (1990). "The law of indemnity in South Carolina", South Carolina law review, Vol. 41. (In english).

[47] Gribaldo, Jacobs, Jones v. Agrippina Versicherunges, 476 P.2d 406 - Cal:Supreme Court (1970).

[48] Guilani (Mirzay-e-Qomi), Abolqasim Ebn-e-Mohammad. (1993). Jami'-ol-Shitat. Vol. 3. Tehran. Keyhan Instutition. (In arabic).

[49] Hal O., Carroll, Vandeveer, Garzia. (2009). "A table of two statutes", The Journal of insurance and indemnity law, Vol. 2, No. 4. (In english).

[50] Hamblin v. Lamont, 433 SW 3d 51 - Tex: Court of Appeals, 4th Dist. (2013).

[51] Harrington Robert E. (1986). "Alaska's public duty exception: Restraints upon the right to contractual indemnity". Alaska law review, Vol. 3:331. (In english).

[52] Harteley, Trevor C. (1976). The law of suretyship and indemnity in the United Kingdom of Greet Britain and Northen Ireland and Ireland, Commission of the European communities. (In english).

[53] Hawkins ex rel. Hawkins v. Peart, 37 P. 3d 1062 - Utah: Supreme Court (2001).

[54] Henthorne v. Legacy Healthcare, Inc., 764 NE 2d 751 - Ind: Court of Appeals (2002).

[55] Howard, B. Thomas. (1936). "Contracts of indemnity against liability and against loss". California Law Review, Vol. 24, No. 2. (In english).

[56] Howell v. River Products Co., 379 NW 2d 919 - Iowa: Supreme Court (1986).

[57] In re Joan and David Halpern Inc., 248 BR 43 - Bankr. Court, SD New York (2000).

[58] Izanloo, Mohsen. (2004). Clauses limiting or excluding liability in contracts. Fourth edition. Tehran, Enteshar Publication Co. (In persian).

[59] John D., Liddle. (1990). "The enforceability of indemnity clauses by negligent parties". Advocates' quarterly. (In english).

[60] Katouzian, Nasser. (2016). Extra Contractual Obligations – Civil Liability. Vol. 1. Fourteenth edition. University of Tehran Press (UTP). (In persian).

[61] Katouzian, Nasser. Izanloo, Mohsen. (2018). Extra Contractual Obligations – Civil Liability: Liability Insurance. Ganj Danesh Publication. (In persian).

[62] Kharazi, Mohsen. (2005). "A survey on the types of banks and their rulings". Fiqh-e-Ahl-al-Bayt Journal. V. 43. No. 43. (In persian).

[63] Laemthong International Lines Ltd v Artis and Others [2005].

[64] Leonberger v. Missouri United School Insurance Council, Mo: Court of Appeals, Eastern Dist., 4th Div. (2016).

[65] Levin v. Friedman, 317 A. 2d 831 - Md:Court of Appeals (1974).

[66] Louis F., Eckert, Russell J., McBrearty. (N. D.). "Prohibitions against indemnification agreements purporting to indemnify a party for its own negligence: A 50 state survey". Litchfield Cavo LLP. (In english).

[67] Majkowski v. American Imaging Management [2006] C.A.No.1797-N.

[68] Marathon EG Holding Limited v. CMS Enterprises Company, (2010).

[69] Martin K. Eby Constructions Company, Inc. v. Onebeacon Insurance Company, Court of Appeals, 10th Circuit (2014).

[70] Mary, Anne Roff. (2014). "Risk allocation in major construction projects". Eversheds, 2014.

[71] McClish v. Niagara Machine & Tool Works, 266 F. Supp. 987 - Dist. Court, SD Indiana (1967).

[72] Mazeaud, Henry & Mazeaud Leon. (1932). Traite Theorique et Pratique de la Responsabilite Civile, T. 3e, Éd. 4e, Paris, Dalloz.

[73] McCalla Robert K. (1960). "Third party indemnity", Nebraska law rewiew, Vol. 39.

[74] Mckeown Meagan. (2015). "Indemnification Agreement for intentional misconduct: Ballancing public policy and freedom to contract in Texas", ST. Marty's law journal, Vol. 46: 345.

[75] Molavi, Kamy, ((A review and update of anti-indemnity statutes)), Construction law seminar, 2012.

[76] Moore, Marie A., ((Indemnification Provision in Leases)), Probate & Property, 2008.

[77] Nematollahi, Esma'il. (2010). "Guaranty as an obligatory rule". Islamic Law Journal. No. 27. (In persian).

[78] New Life In Christ Full Gospel Church Corporation v. Los Angeles Regional Food Bank, Cal: Court of Appeal, 2nd Appellate Dist., 7th Div. (2012).

[79] Northwest Airlines v. Hughes Air Corp., 702 P. 2d 1192 - Wash: Supreme Court (1985).

[80] Outreville, Jean-François. (2002). Theory and practice of insurance. Translated by: Abdolnaser Hemmati, Ali, Dehghani. Tehran. Bime-ye-Markazi. (In persian).

[81] Oxy USA, Inc. v. Southwestern Energy Prod. Co., 161 SW 3d 277 - Tex: Court of Appeals, 13th Dist. (2005).

[82] Planters Gin v. Federal Compress, 78 SW 3d 885 - Tenn: Supreme Court (2002).

[83] Queen Villas Homeowners v. TCB Property Management, 149 Cal.App. 4th 1 (2007).

[84] Planiol Marcel, Ripert Georges. (1952). Traite Pratique droit civil français, T. 6, deuxième edition. Paris. Librarie generale de droit et du jurisprudence. (In french).

[85] Par Electrical Contractors, Inc. v. Blueline Rental LLC, Dist. Court, ED Washington (2017).

[86] Potamkin Lawrence, Plotka Norman L. (1944). "Indemnification against tort liability – The hold harmless clause – Its' interperetation and effect upon insurance". University of Pennsylvania law review, Vol. 92. (In english).

[87] Ramirez v. Penske Truck Leasing Corp., 2017 NY Slip Op 30682 - NY: Supreme Court (2017).

[88] Reesor v. Norman Yatooma & Associates, PC (2010).

[89] Reyburn Lawn & Landscape Designers, Inc. v. Plaster Dev. Co., Inc., 255 P. 3d 268 - Nev: Supreme Court (2011).

[90] Riecken, Gilson S. (2010). "The duty to defend under non-insurance indemnity agreements: Crawford v. Weather shield manufacturing, Inc. and its troubling consequences for design professionals. Santa Clara law review, Vol. 50. (In english).

[91] Robins Engineering, Inc. v. Cockrell, 354 So. 2d1 - Ala:Supreme Court (1977).

[92] Roedder Jr., William C. (1981 - 1982). "Contractual indemnity in Alabama". Alabama law review, Vol. 33:31. (In english).

[93] Rooz v. Kimmel, 55 Cal. App. 4th 573 - Cal:Court of Appeal, 1st Appellate Dist., 3rd Div. (1997).

[94] San Pedro Properties, Inc. v. Sayre & Toso, Inc., 203 Cal. App. 2d 750 - Cal: Court of Appeal (1962).

[95] Sartain, J. Charles W., Ballew, Wayne, Salter, Robert. (2013). "Indemnification and exculpation agreements in the oil patch", Looper Reed & McGraw, P.C. (In english).

[96] Shine, David. (2005). "Contractual applications of negligence / gross negligence standards: considerations under New York law", The M & A lawyer. (In english).

[97] Simon v. Corbetta construction Co., Inc., 391 F. Supp. 708 - Dist. Court, SD New York (1975).

[98] Smith v. South Wales Switchgear Co. Ltd., [1978] 1 W.L.R.

[99] Smith International Inc. v. Egle Group LLC, Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit (2007).

[100] Snohomish Cty. Public v. Firstgroup America, 271 P. 3d 850 - Wash: Supreme Court (2012).

[101] Snow, Gordon H. (1958). "Indemnity agreements". Insurance counsel journal, July. (In english).

[102] Specialized Contracting v. St. Paul Fire, 825 NW 2d 872 - ND:Supreme Court (2012).

[103] Steinmetz Karel E. (1910). "Contracts of guaranty and indemnity and credit insurance". American law review. (In english).

[104] Sunset-Sternau Food Co. v. Bonzi, 389 P. 2d 133 - Cal: Supreme Court (1964).

[105] Tabtaba'i Hakim, Sayyed Mohsen. (1995). Mostamsik Al-Orwat al-Wothqa. Vol. 13. Qom. Dar-Al-Tafsir Institution. (In arabic).

[106] Tabtaba'i Yazdi, Sayyed Mohammad Kazem. (1988). Al-Orwat al-Wothqa. Vol. 2. Second edition. Qom. Isma'ilian Institution. (In arabic).

[107] Tabtaba'i Yazdi, Sayyed Mohammad Kazem. (2000). Hashiyat al-Makasib. Vol. 2. Second edition. Beirut. Alaalami al- Matbooat Institute. (In arabic).

[108] Teter v. Morris, 650 SW 2d 277 - Mo: Court of Appeals, Western Dist. (1982).

[109] Total v. Arcadia, Int. Com. [1997] L. R. 11/18.

[110] Tubb v. Bartlett, 862 SW 2d 740 - Tex: Court of Appeals, 8th Dist. (1993).

[111] Tull Bros., Inc. v. Peerless Products, Inc., 953 F. Supp. 2d 1245 - Dist. Court, SD Alabama (2013).

[112] UDC-Universal Development, LP v. CH2M Hill, 181 Cal. App. 4th 10 - Cal: Court of Appeal, 6th Appellate Dist. (2010).

[113] Viney, Geneviève, Jourdain, Patrice. (2001). Traite de droit civil, deuxième edition, Paris. L.G.D.J, 2001. (In french).

[114] Weinberg Wheeler. (N. D.). Agreements to indemnify & general liability insurance: A fifty state survey, Hudings Gunn & Dial. (In english).

[115] Weller v. Eames, 15 Minn. 461,467 (1870).

[116] Williams, Chester Arthur. (2006). Risk management and insurance. Translated by: Davar, Venus, Hojjatollah, Goudarzi. Tehran. Negah Danesh Publication. Second edition. (In persian).

[117] Yang v. Voyagaire Houseboats, Inc., 701 NW2d783 - Minn:Supreme Court (2005).

[118] دادنامه‌ شماره 92/452/14 صادره از شعبه‌ی 14 دیوان عالی کشور مورخ 02/07/1392.

[119] دادنامه‌ شماره 57‌.‌22 شعبه 22 دیوان عالی کشور به تاریخ 02/02/1362.

[120] دادنامه شماره 9309970925300893 صادره از شعبه 4 دادگاه تجدیدنظر استان خ. به تاریخ 12/05/1393 ابرام شده از سوی شعبه‌ی 38 دیوان عالی کشور.

[121] دادنامه شماره 9109970222301515 صادره از شعبه 23 دادگاه تجدیدنظر استان تهران به تاریخ 17/11/1391.

[122] دادنامه شماره 9209970221001554 صادره از شعبه 10 دادگاه تجدیدنظر استان تهران به تاریخ 13/11/1392.

[123] دادنامه شماره 9309970221601356 صادره از شعبه 16 دادگاه تجدیدنظر استان تهران به تاریخ 22/10/1393.

[124] دادنامه شماره 9209972109200646 صادره از شعبه اول دادگاه عمومی بخش آفتاب شهرستان اسلامشهر.

[125] دادنامه شماره 648-91/9/29 صادره از شعبه 103 دادگاه عمومی حقوقی تهران مورخ 29/09/1391.

[126] دادنامه شماره 0413-90/6/5 صادره از شعبه 213 دادگاه عمومی حقوقی تهران مورخ 05/06/1390.

[127] دادنامه شماره 236-930 صادره از شعبه 216 دادگاه عمومی حقوقی تهران مورخ 21/03/1393.

[128] دادنامه شماره 9109970229000953 صادره از شعبه 30 دادگاه عمومی حقوقی تهران مورخ 30/08/1391.

[129] دادنامه شماره 9109970213600116 صادره از شعبه 185 دادگاه عمومی حقوقی تهران.

[130] دادنامه شماره 9109970223701410 صادره از شعبه 37 دادگاه تجدیدنظر استان تهران مورخ 28/11/1391.

[131] دادنامه شماره 9209970221200221 صادره از سوی شعبه 12 دادگاه تجدیدنظر استان تهران مورخ 30/02/1392.

[132] دادنامه‌ شماره 9309970270400010 صادره از شعبه 59 دادگاه تجدیدنظر استان تهران به تاریخ 19/01/1393.

[133] دادنامه‌ شماره 9109970221501683 صادره از شعبه 15 دادگاه تجدیدنظر استان تهران به تاریخ 27/12/1391؛ دادنامه شماره 793 شعبه 116 دادگاه عمومی حقوقی تهران به تاریخ 28/03/1390.

[134] دادنامi شماره 9209972214100372 صادره از شعبه 1 دادگاه عمومی حقوقی رودهن.

[135] دادنامه شماره 644 صادره از شعبه 83 دادگاه عمومی حقوقی تهران مورخ 26/10/1391.