Analysis of Judgment Cass. Civ., United Sections no. 22437/2018: Claims Made Clauses in Insurance

Judgment no. 22437/2018 of the Court of Cassation, United Sections, addressed a highly relevant issue in the insurance field, namely the validity of "claims made" clauses. These clauses, which limit the insurer's indemnity obligation to claims for which a request was made during the policy's term, have raised significant legal questions and doubts about their merit.

The Case Under Review

The appeal was filed by Manitowoc Crane Group Italy S.R.L. against Allianz S.P.A., following an incident that occurred in 2002, when a crane boom fell and damaged a warehouse. The central issue concerned the validity of a claims made clause included in the insurance contracts stipulated by Manitowoc. The Court of Appeal of Venice had initially upheld Allianz's challenge, arguing that the clause was neither void nor unfair, but Manitowoc contested this decision before the Court of Cassation.

The claims made clause, while considered atypical, cannot be declared void solely for limiting the object of the insurance contract.

The Court's Conclusions

The Court of Cassation, partially upholding the appeal, established a fundamental legal principle: the civil liability insurance model with claims made clauses is valid, provided it complies with current regulations. The Court clarified that the object of insurance must remain tied to the concept of a claim, understood not as a request for compensation, but as a damaging event.

• The validity of claims made clauses is recognized, but it must respect the balance between the rights of the parties.
• The insurance contract must be adequate to the interests of the parties, ensuring effective coverage.
• Clauses cannot create disadvantageous situations for the insured, such as limiting the right to indemnity.

Implications for the Insurance Sector

This judgment has significant implications for the insurance sector, as it provides a clear framework regarding the use of claims made clauses. Insurance companies must pay close attention to the drafting of contracts, ensuring that there are no conditions that could be considered unfair or inequitable to policyholders. Compliance with merit and contractual balance is essential to ensure the validity of policies and the protection of policyholders' rights.

Conclusions

Judgment no. 22437/2018 of the Court of Cassation represents a step forward in clarifying the regulations concerning claims made clauses in the insurance sector. It underscores the importance of proper disclosure and a balanced contract, safeguarding the rights of policyholders and promoting greater transparency in contractual relationships.