The insurer who has not provided evidence of the policyholder's non-compliance with Fire Safety Regulations is obligated to make an insurance payment in compensation for damage caused as a result of the fire.
In the civil case on the claim of IP "I." to JSC "Subsidiary Insurance Company of the People's Bank of Kazakhstan "Halyk Kazakhinstrakh" for the recovery of the insured sum of 117,732,537 tenge, on the counterclaim of JSC "Subsidiary Insurance Company of the People's Bank of Kazakhstan "Halyk Kazakhinstrakh" to IP "I." on the recognition of the property insurance contract No. 07/306/09/262 dated 28 The decision of the specialized interdistrict Economic Court of the West Kazakhstan region dated June 28, 2011 was invalid., as left unchanged by the decisions of the appellate and cassation judicial boards of the West Kazakhstan Regional Court of August 22 and September 29, 2011, respectively, the claims of IP "I." are satisfied. In his favor, an insurance payment in the amount of 117,325,537 tenge was collected from Halyk Kazakhinstrakh JSC, a penalty – 10,831,160 tenge, the cost of paying state duty – 1,177,325 tenge, representative services – 4,000,000 tenge, court costs in the amount of 71,888 tenge were collected to the state income. The counterclaim of Halyk Kazakhinstrakh JSC was denied. In the case, it was established that a property insurance contract was concluded between IP "I." and JSC "Halyk-Kazakhinstrakh" on April 27, 2009. The object of insurance is the property interests of the policyholder related to the possession, use or disposal of movable property - timber stored in warehouses, as well as the risk of its loss (death) or damage as a result of insured events. Clause 2.4. of the contract establishes the average monthly balance of goods in the warehouse in the amount of 150,000,000 tenge, the total insurance amount is set at the same amount. According to clause 3.1. the contract recognizes the fire as an insured event.
The insurer who has not provided evidence of the policyholder's non-compliance with Fire Safety Regulations is obligated to make an insurance payment in compensation for damage caused as a result of the fire.
On the night of August 12, 2009, a fire broke out on the territory of an open lumber warehouse, as a result of which part of the stored lumber was destroyed by fire. Fire-technical and forensic accounting examinations were conducted in the case, according to the conclusions of which the cause of the fire and the cost of the burned material were established. According to expert opinion No. 1918 dated September 01, 2009, the cause of the fire was an open source of fire in the form of a burning match flame or another ignition source similar in power. The amount of damage amounted to 117,732,537 tenge. The court motivated the satisfaction of the claims of IP "I." by concluding that an insured event had occurred, since arson had taken place and property damage had been caused to the plaintiff as a result of the resulting fire. The arguments stated in the supervisory protest that IP "I." had not complied with fire safety requirements were declared untenable by the supervisory judicial board, since the cause of the fire was arson, and not a violation of fire Safety Rules. The defendant has not provided evidence of his inspections and detection of violations of these Rules on the part of the policyholder prior to the occurrence of the insured event. According to clause 3.4 of the contract, the insurer has the right to terminate the contract if the policyholder violates the established rules and norms of fire safety, protection of premises and valuables, safety of work or other similar norms. The defendant did not carry out such checks before the occurrence of the insured event and did not exercise his right, which is his omission.
Therefore, the arguments of JSC "Subsidiary Insurance Company of Halyk Bank of Kazakhstan "Halyk Kazakhinstrakh" about the policyholder's lack of interest in preserving property were found to be unsupported evidence. It follows from the case file that the insurance company took measures to conduct an independent investigation of the causes of the fire and determine the amount of damage, for which the audit company Almas LLP was involved. Calculations were made, and the audit company concluded that it was impossible to determine the amount of damage. Thus, the defendant used his rights stipulated in the contract, and the plaintiff did not interfere with the exercise of his rights to investigate the cause of the fire. Taking into account the circumstances established in the case, by the decision of the supervisory judicial board No. 3gp- 288-11 dated March 20, 2012, the judicial acts held in the case remained unchanged due to the correct application by the courts of lower instances of the norms of the law and the provisions of the insurance contract.
Attention!
Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.
For more information, please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085.
Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office Court Cases
