{"id":634,"date":"2021-03-25T15:01:15","date_gmt":"2021-03-25T12:01:15","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/askolds.com\/?p=634"},"modified":"2026-01-27T20:14:48","modified_gmt":"2026-01-27T17:14:48","slug":"les-clauses-dexclusion-doivent-etre-prouvees-par-lassureur-et-non-pas-par-lassure","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/askolds.com\/en\/actualite-assurance\/les-clauses-dexclusion-doivent-etre-prouvees-par-lassureur-et-non-pas-par-lassure\/","title":{"rendered":"EXCLUSION CLAUSES MUST BE PROVEN BY THE INSURER AND NOT BY THE INSURER"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Court of Cassation, 23 October 2019, Appeal number: 18-14140<br \/>\nThe Court of Cassation recalls that the exclusion clauses must be proved by the insurer, unlike the guarantee conditions, the proof of which is the responsibility of the insured.<\/p>\n<p>(&#8230;) That in so ruling, whereas it was the responsibility of Helvetia assurances, whose principle of guarantee was acquired when the goods had been received damaged as a result of the break in the cold chain at the latest on the fifth day following the arrival of the ship at the port of Lom\u00e9, to establish a possible cause for exclusion from its guarantee, the Court of Appeal, which reversed the burden of proof, violated the abovementioned text ;<br \/>\nFOR THESE REASONS, and without the need to rule on the other objections (&#8230;)&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>In other words, if the insurer objects to an exclusion clause, you must first check whether or not the insurer proves that the conditions for applying such an exclusion are met.<\/p>\n<p>For example, if theft without a break-in is excluded, it is up to the insurer to prove the absence of a break-in by producing an expert report, for example, which mentions this circumstance in a probative and certain way.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Court of Cassation, 23 October 2019, Appeal number: 18-14140 The Court of Cassation recalls that the exclusion clauses must be proved by the insurer, unlike the guarantee conditions, the proof of which is the responsibility of the insured. (&#8230;) That in so ruling, whereas it was the responsibility of Helvetia assurances, whose principle of guarantee&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[12,19,23],"tags":[],"translation":{"provider":"WPGlobus","version":"2.5.23","language":"en","enabled_languages":["fr","en"],"languages":{"fr":{"title":true,"content":true,"excerpt":false},"en":{"title":true,"content":true,"excerpt":false}}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/askolds.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/634"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/askolds.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/askolds.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/askolds.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/askolds.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=634"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"http:\/\/askolds.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/634\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":984,"href":"http:\/\/askolds.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/634\/revisions\/984"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/askolds.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=634"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/askolds.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=634"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/askolds.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=634"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}