The High Court in London recently heard a case where there was such a conflict involving an Equity Red Star Trade Policy. The policy was issued to a vehicle transport company. The schedule stipulated that the policy covered a limited number of vehicles being driven on Trade Plates. The class of use on the schedule was described as “Business use of the Insured”.

The Certificate differed, and stated, “Any private car or commercial vehicle the property of the policyholder or in their custody or control including any motor vehicle bearing a trade plate number owned by the policyholder.” The class of use as stated on the certificate was “Use for social, domestic and pleasure purposes and for the business of the policyholder.”

In September 2017 an employee of the Insured had collected a vehicle that was due to be delivered to a client a few days later. On the second day the employee, driving the vehicle, without trade plates, and for what appeared to be social and domestic purposes, was involved in a collision in which the third-party vehicle driver suffered serious injury.

A dispute arose between Allianz (ordinarily the Insurers of the transported car) and ERS, as to whether the ERS policy applied.

Beltrami J, addressing the apparent conflict in the ERS Policy found that the ERS policy did not apply.

“I find that the conflict should be resolved in ERS’s favour. Taking the ERS Policy as a whole, the operative document which defined the insured vehicles and the cover which applied was the Schedule. That Schedule was unambiguous as to those matters. The Certificate served a different purpose and should, in the event of inconsistency, have to yield to the Schedule on such matters.”

The Judgement can be read here.