ARMED TRAWLERS AND SALVAGE 



Amongst the cases relating to mine-sweepers and 

 fishermen which from time to time came into courts 

 of law was one of an interesting nature regarding 

 an insurance policy which did not show the com- 

 paii}- concerned in a very favourable light. 



A fisherman had insured his life by a policy 

 dated November 14, 1914. He expected to go mine- 

 sweeping, but while waiting to do so he disappeared, 

 and it was supposed that he had fallen overboard. 

 The executrix claimed to recover the amount due 

 under the policy, but the company refused to pay, 

 alleging that the fisherman had made misrepresenta- 

 tions on his proposal form and had withheld material 

 information. The misrepresentations and conceal- 

 ment alleged were a statement that the policy was 

 for his own benefit, and a statement that he was a 

 fisherman, whereas, in fact, besides being a fisher- 

 man he was a member of the Royal Naval Reserve, 

 and at the time of making the proposal he had been 

 called up for service. 



The case was originally heard by a county court 

 judge, who decided that there was no evidence that 

 the agent who took the proposal ever communicated 

 the facts to the company before the issue of the 

 policy, and he therefore held that the policy was 

 void ab initio and that the receipt of premiums by 

 the superintendent after the issue of the policy did 

 not bind the company. He therefore gave judgment 

 for the company. 



The matter was not allowed to rest at that stage. 

 The plaintiff appealed against the decision of the 



133 



