At the beginning of the 2010s, an innovative jurisprudence developed within the Court of Cassation which considered that intentional misconduct could be a willful and deliberate misconduct depriving the insurance contract of its character by definition random.
CONSCIOUS WILLINGNESS TO “PLAY INSURANCE”
Thus, two judgments of the second civil chamber of the Court of Cassation of 30 June 2011 (Cass. 2nd civ., 30 June 2011, No. 10-23. 004) and of 14 June 2012 (Cass. 2nd civ., 14 June 2012, No. 11-17.367) considered, with regard to the liability of corporate directors, that intentional misconduct could be deduced from the conscious will to bear the financial consequences of the misconduct committed by the directors.
This ” new ” intentional fault by erasure therefore excluded the insurance guarantee.
VOLUNTARY AND DELIBERATE RISK – TAKING
In a judgment of 12 September 2013 (Cass. 2nd civ., 12 Sept. 2013, No. 12-24.650, Bull civ. II, No. 168) the Court of Cassation held that the insured, although he did not directly seek the harmful consequences, had taken a voluntary risk and committed an intentional fault in that it removed from the contract its randomness. The high magistrates thus sanctioned by the absence of coverage the fraudulent fault of the insured due to a voluntary taking of risk.
Clarification from the Plenary Assembly would be welcome.