At the Juncture between Disclosure and Warranty in Marine Insurance Law: a recent case from Hong Kong

Marine insurance law in Hong Kong, namely the Marine Insurance Ordinance (Cap. 329), is identical to the Marine Insurance Act 1906 (MIA) of the United Kingdom. The MIA is notorious on its demand for what a prospective assured has to disclose prior to a conclusion of a marine insurance contract. Yet, it is provided that, in the absence of inquiry, the prospective assured does not have to disclose what the insurer is presumed to know in the ordinary course of his business or what is mentioned in the express or implied warranty. The recent decision of the Court of Appeal in Hong Kong in The Ho Feng 7, which reversed the decision of the Court of First Instance in the same case, demonstrated uncertainty as to the duty of disclosure when there is a warranty. This article seeks to review the fact of the case, examine the reasoning of the Court of First Instance, the reasoning of the Court of Appeal, and provide analysis on the extent of matters which do not have to be disclosed.