Gray v Barr
An insured who killed a man in circumstances amounting to manslaughter could not recover an indemnity under his liability insurance, because public policy prevents a person from being indemnified for the consequences of a deliberate criminal act of violence.
Facts
Mr Barr suspected that his wife was having an affair with Mr Gray. He went to Mr Gray's house with a loaded shotgun, intending to frighten him. During a struggle on the stairs, the gun went off, killing Mr Gray. Mr Barr was acquitted of murder and manslaughter, but Mr Gray's widow sued him for damages, and he sought an indemnity from his insurers under a policy which covered liability for accidental bodily injury.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal held that Mr Barr was not entitled to an indemnity. Lord Denning MR said that the death was not caused by accident, because it was caused by Mr Barr's deliberate act in threatening Mr Gray with a loaded gun, and that in any event public policy would prevent him from recovering an indemnity, because he had been guilty of manslaughter, as found by the civil court, involving a deliberate act of violence. The court should not allow a person to be indemnified against the consequences of his own crime, where the crime involved deliberate, intentional and unlawful violence or threats of violence.
Related cases on coverage, causation, claims and subrogation
- Agapitos v Agnew (The Aegeon) [2002] EWCA Civ 247, [2003] QB 556
- Castellain v Preston (1883) 11 QBD 380
- Financial Conduct Authority v Arch Insurance (UK) Ltd [2021] UKSC 1, [2021] AC 649
- Galloway v Guardian Royal Exchange (UK) Ltd [1999] Lloyd's Rep IR 209
- Global Process Systems Inc v Syarikat Takaful Malaysia Berhad (The Cendor Mopu) [2011] UKSC 5
- Lexington Insurance Co v AGF Insurance Ltd [2009] UKHL 40, [2010] 1 AC 180
- Leyland Shipping Co Ltd v Norwich Union Fire Insurance Society Ltd [1918] AC 350
- Lord Napier and Ettrick v Hunter [1993] AC 713
Studying insurance law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
