ClearMains
The language adopted in the policy should be clear and unambiguous, and every policy, if it is meant to cover any extra-territorial jurisdiction, must be clearly mentioned, said the Supreme Court Bench
Quick Revision
Prelims-testable facts
Trap alerts
Mains Practice Question
Critically examine the implications of ambiguous and sloppy policy terms on the liability of insurance companies.
250 words
Practice this in the exam hall →Prelims Practice MCQs
The Supreme Court Bench said which aspect of language in insurance policies should be clear?
The Supreme Court Bench emphasized the need for clear and unambiguous language in insurance policies to avoid confusion and disputes.
Every policy, if it is meant to cover any extra-territorial jurisdiction, must be clearly mentioned as per which court?
The Supreme Court Bench ruled that insurance policies covering extra-territorial jurisdictions must explicitly mention this fact.
What is the specific provision related to extra-territorial jurisdiction in insurance policies?
The Supreme Court Bench specified that every insurance policy, if it covers any extra-territorial jurisdiction, must have a clear mention of this in the policy terms.
Consider the following statements regarding Insurance Policy Clarity: 1. The Supreme Court Bench has ruled that insurance policies must clearly mention extra-territorial jurisdiction. 2. The Supreme Court Bench has stated that insurance companies often use ambiguous policy terms to evade liability. 3. The Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA) has issued new guidelines for clear policy language. How many of the above statements are correct?
Statement 1 is correct because the fact list states that every policy meant to cover extra-territorial jurisdiction must be clearly mentioned. Statement 2 is correct because the fact list describes the Supreme Court Bench's ruling as using 'ambiguous' and 'sloppy' policy terms. Statement 3 is incorrect because there is no mention of IRDA issuing new guidelines in the fact list.
Consider the following two statements: Statement-I: The Supreme Court Bench has ruled that insurance policies must clearly mention extra-territorial jurisdiction. Statement-II: This ruling is intended to prevent insurance companies from using ambiguous policy terms to evade liability. Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?
Statement 2 explains why Statement 1 is true because the ruling's intent is to address the issue of insurance companies using ambiguous policy terms.