E. SFEIR & CO v. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW ZEALAND, LTD. PER GLYNDOVA (GHANA) LTD.
May 18, 1962
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- OLLENNU J
Areas of Law
- Insurance Law
- Contract Law
- Civil Procedure
May 18, 1962
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
These consolidated suits arose from cargo losses insured under marine policies issued by the National Insurance Company of New Zealand Ltd. for shipments aboard S.S. Bygdoy. The insurer was sued locally through Messrs. Glyndova (Ghana) Ltd., identified on the policies as the entity to notify of loss and through whom claims were payable. The plaintiffs pleaded Glyndova were agents responsible for payment of claims; Glyndova denied authority to litigate, asserting a limited role in surveying losses and forwarding documents. Treating agency as a preliminary issue, OLLENNU J examined correspondence appointing Glyndova as “claims settling agents” and the policy endorsement. Applying established principles of agency as to third persons, the court concluded Glyndova’s authority was special and limited, permitting claims assessment and payment routing after admission or adjudication, but not the defense of suits. Glyndova was struck out as a party, with costs fixed at 25 guineas.
JUDGMENT OF OLLENNU J.
Each of the plaintiff-firms in these consolidated suits is insured with the National Insurance Company of New Zealand ltd., the defendants in each of the said suits, and each claims for loss suffered of cargo they insured with the defendant-company under a marine insurance policy upon the ship S.S. Bygdoy and cargo. In each of the said suits the National Insurance Company of New Zealand Ltd., hereinafter called the Insurance Company, were sued per Messrs. Glyndova (Ghana) Ltd., hereinafter called Glyndova, as their agents.
It was pleaded for the plaintiffs that Glyndova are local agents by whom claims made on the Insurance Company are payable. Glyndova denied that they are agents of the Insurance Company as pleaded by the plaintiffs. They say that the duties they have to perform for the Insurance Company are limited to the assessment of claims on behalf of the Insurance Company, and the forwarding of documents to the Insurance Company or branches thereof. Glyndova contend therefore that they cannot sue or be sued on behalf of the Insurance Company. Therefore the question as to whether or not Glyndova are agents liable to be sued as representatives of the Insurance Company has to be resolved as a preliminary issue, and the proceedings so far have been limited to that issue.
There is no doubt upon the evidence tendered on this issue, both oral and documentary, that Glyndova are agents of the Insurance Company. The question is what is the nature of their agency, is it a special agency or is it a general agency? And if a special agency, what are its limits?
Glyndova's authority to act for the Insurance Company is contained in the letters exchanged between them and the Insurance Company. The extent of their agency or authority therefore depends upon the interpretation to be placed upon those documents. It is a principle of law that while as between the agent and his principal the authority may be limited by an agreement or special instructions, yet as regards third persons, the authority which the agent has is that which he is reasonable believed to have, having regard to all the circumstances, and which is reasonably to be gathered from the nature of his employment and duties in relation to the third persons: see Halsbury's Laws of England, (3rd ed.) Vol. 1, page 161, para. 378; Brady v. Todd1; Cox v. Midland Counties Railway Co.2; Russo-Chinese Bank v. Li Yau Sam.3 Therefore in addition to the letters exchanged between Glyndova and