Principle of Contribution

Definition

The contribution is the right of the insurer to call others as well, but it is not necessary

the same as the guarantee for the same insurer to share the cost of the payment of the guilty charge. 

The principle of contribution enables all claims to be harmonious. Contributions doctrine functions as a corollary of Indemnity doctrine and therefore it applies to the case of general insurance.

As with the doctrine of donation, the lawsuit is awarded for losses incurred on property, which is insured and several insurers must be carefully divided between theirs according to the potential loss rate.

Amount of total compensation or compensation paid to insurers and all

The insurance should not exceed the loss rate.Sometimes when the value of an asset is too high the risk level is involved higher with that particular property if the insurer and company make up a large portion of total risk. This also increases the risk of the business (operation) of the insurer company. Usually insurance companies try to accommodate a large number of low price policies for diversified benefits. Hybrid is used to reduce the risk level of the insurance company.

Instead of avoiding the business that comes from the following large insurers the practice of writing valuable assets. So one insurance costs the general portion of the securities of the property and the property is insured by a group of two or more persons insurance companies.

This action has further implications in the case of termination of related claims for deals like this. The question of how much compensation should be given by every Insurance needs to be dealt with. It is here that the doctrine of Contribution applies to solve such problems.

The insurer has the option of recovering from any insurance on a priority basis. After recovering part of the loss from the first insurer may approach the other insurance as per donation doctrine. If an insurer provides the insured with a complete insurance company can claim part of the compensation from other insurance companies.

It wants to apply the doctrine of donation

1. Insurance property / Person (in the case of insured insurance) must be normal

for all policies

2. The risk of insurance against must be common to all policies

3. The owner of property insurance must be the same person

4. All policies must be applicable in the event of a loss

Example-

1. Where there are two insurers covering the property equally, if each is lost

it must pay half the compensation.

Definition

Not the latest, but the most direct, big, effective and effective cause that should be is considered an estimate.

When an insurance policy is purchased it is given with respect to certain risks, which can causing loss to the policyholder. No policy covers all types of risks. Insurance

The company is obligated to hedge only against insurance risks. The term "Causing the truth" means an immediate cause or a direct cause. In insurance fraud relates to the immediate cause of the mishap, which resulted not a loss.

In general insurance there are several policies on car insurance, property insurance, fire insurance, insurance for theft, etc. Each policy offers protection from the risks mentioned in the policy.

If someone buys fire insurance for their home the protection will be from loss caused by fire, which may have been caused by the sources mentioned in the policy. In if a fire arises from any source other than that specified in the policy does not have to pay for insurance.

For example if a person has insurance to be protected against a fire caused by lightning short circuits and fires occur due to leakage of the LPG cylinder and then cover the company is not responsible for paying for losses. In this case only if the fire was caused by

A short circuit would have losses covered. All information relating to the cause of reason should be clearly stated during the Entering the Agreement. Sometimes the reasons that are not covered by the policy must be It is clearly mentioned and although it is not possible to specify all possible causes

which should be avoided is usually taken for signaling. Replenishment by compensation is entirely dependent on the reasons agreed upon.

Determination of approximate factor

Where mishap takes place as a single event the decision to Cause it is easy and the event can be attributed to the loss. In the case where the loss takes place as a series of events and one event in the other

General insurance policies and practices it can be difficult to determine the exact cause of the damage. In such an event, The characters should investigate carefully and find out the exact cause of the loss, the extent to which the loss is caused by the factor facing the rate compensation paid on its basis. It may happen to be a real risk, which it has it caused losses in turn, caused by other risks.

It should be noted that when deciding the cause of a 'proximate' sequence of events depending on their time of occurrence is not recommended. The deciding factor is correct  the cause of the loss.

Many court decisions act as models for arriving at decisions residence. Listed below:

I. Insurance is responsible for:

l When an accident is a single incident and has insurance.

l Where insurance risk (in the event the policy is taken

protection) takes place first and is followed by a designated hazard (incident

which is not covered by the policy, i.e., which has no insurance). Here

The insurer must pay for losses, which were incurred until they occurred

of the hazard allocated if the two risks can be distinguished from each other

more.

l Where the excluded risk poses an insurance risk and events occur in a

the broken chain the insurance pays for the loss caused by the insurer

dangerous.

l Where both accidents occur simultaneously and both events occur

independent of each other.

II. Unknown Insurance:

l Where an excluded risk is a risk factor for insurance and they do

series

l Where insurance risk is followed by external risk and both cannot be

to be distinguished from each other.

l Where both accidents occur simultaneously

Examples -

1. In the case of Tootal Broadhurst Lee & Co. vs. London and Lancashire Fire Insurance

Co. was caused by an earthquake. Here the earthquake was not part of

risk covered so the insurer was not liable since the loss was approximately

with the exception of risk.

2. If a fire causes an explosion (danger is out), the insurance will be

responsible for fire damage until the time of the explosion.

3. In the case of Marsden vs City and Country Assurance Co., Marsden was

cover his glass of dishes from any danger other than fire. Finally a fire broke out

neighboring buildings and in the conflict that followed other villains

break into the palace by smashing the glass cover plate to steal. Like

decisively the cause of the loss was that of the hit crowd and not

fire. The insurer was therefore responsible for the loss.