An insurance company is ordered to pay 1.5 million euros to the family of a man who underwent life insurance one year before committing suicide

December 02 , 2016 // Legal Reforms and Debate

Published in Poder Judicial

The insurer alleged that the policyholder provided false and inaccurate information about their financial and assets, and did not reveal that in their family had a history of suicides

The Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court has confirmed the conviction of an insurance company to pay 1.5 million euros to a family for the life insurance subscribed by the father a year before committing suicide. The insurer alleged that the policyholder provided false and inaccurate information about his financial and financial situation (which was worse than he said), and did not reveal that his family had a history of suicide, which would have prevented a correct valuation of the Risk assured and released him from the obligation to pay.

However, the Supreme Court rejects such arguments and supports the criteria of the Madrid Provincial Court, which considered that the veracity of the data on the economic situation provided by the insured to the insurer prior to the signing of the contract had not been distorted. life insurance. Likewise, the Audiencia of Madrid rules out that the insured party arranged the insurance with the purpose of committing suicide a year later.

The Court of First Instance number 5 of Alcalá de Henares had dismissed the claim of the widow and the two children of the insured to collect each one 500,000 euros of Aegón Seguros as beneficiaries of the life insurance subscribed by their husband and father respectively. The insurance was signed on April 15, 2009, with an insured capital of 1.5 million euros in the event of death, which occurred on April 20, 2010 for suicide. The court understood that the insurer of the relevant data about his financial situation, which was very hurried, was hidden by the policyholder, and this was also reflected in the note he left after his suicide, where he alluded unequivocally to those economic problems and to no other, With the phrase "to get ahead my family".

However, the Madrid Court reversed that ruling and estimated the family's appeal. He emphasized that the reports submitted by the parties on the economic situation of the insured are contradictory, based on different valuation criteria, without there being other evidence sufficiently strong to attribute more credibility to one or the other report. Therefore, he understood that the veracity of the data provided by the insured to the insurer, prior to signing the insurance contract, has not been invalidated.
The Supreme Court, before whom Aegón Seguros appealed, emphasizes that the conclusion of the Provincial Court is not illogical, irrational or arbitrary, nor can it be preached that it incurs a patent error, and therefore rejects the appellant's arguments.
In addition, it also dismisses its claim not to pay the interest of delay imposed by the Hearing, for what alleged as a justified cause the existence of uncertainty about the coverage of the incident that had made the intervention of justice required by the discrepancy of the parties . The ruling, which has been the judge of the judge Eduardo Baena, answers that "if any claim based on life insurance would allow that claim, then unproven, was constituted in justified cause to be exempted the insurer of payment Of the interests of article 20 of the Insurance Contract Law, per se and without anything more that reinforces it, would be made a non-restrictive interpretation and, therefore, contrary to the sanctioning character attributed to the norm. "