Disability and income protection policies often contain a requirement that the insured is under the regular care and attention of a medical practitioner for there to be cover.
The decision of the New South Wales Supreme Court in Atton v National Mutual Life Association of Australasia [2007] NSWSC 310 is a useful guide to what this means in practice.
The policy required the insured to be 'under the regular care and attendance of a medical practitioner'.
The insured visited his General Practitioner once. The Court held this was insufficient for the insured to be under the required regular care and attendance. It held repetitive medical assistance and a number of appointments are required. The Court did not state a minimum number but clearly it is more than one.
While Australian decisions are not binding on a New Zealand Court, they are influential. This is a useful overseas precedent for New Zealand underwriters to draw on when considering whether the terms of cover are satisfied.
Phillips Fox has changed its name to DLA Phillips Fox because the firm entered into an exclusive alliance with DLA Piper, one of the largest legal services organisations in the world. We will retain our offices in every major commercial centre in Australia and New Zealand, with no operational change to your relationship with the firm. DLA Phillips Fox can now take your business one step further − by connecting you to a global network of legal experience, talent and knowledge.
This publication is intended as a first point of reference and should not be relied on as a substitute for professional advice. Specialist legal advice should always be sought in relation to any particular circumstances and no liability will be accepted for any losses incurred by those relying solely on this publication.
