BROADCASTS.com

Insurance Conditions Precedent\n

Video available at https://youtu.be/I1ByB3cE34E. 

When used in contract law, the word condition refers  to an event, the occurrence or non-concurrence of which alters the  previously existing relations of the parties by creating or  extinguishing a legal duty. A condition is different from a promise or  warranty. When used in an insurance policy the condition imposes duties  on the insured (the promisor) and gives a corresponding right to the  insurer (the promisee). Breach of a condition gives the insurer legal  justification for refusing to perform its obligations under the policy.

There are two types of conditions:

\n
• conditions precedent; and
\n
• conditions subsequent.
\n

The distinction is significant in the resolution of insurance  disputes because it determines the allocation of the burden of proof.  The insured has the burden of proving the fulfillment of a condition  precedent. The insurer has the burden of proving that a condition  subsequent has not been fulfilled in order to avoid liability.

A condition precedent is an event, not certain to occur, which must  occur, unless its non-performance is excused, before performance under a  contract becomes due. [Restatement (Second) of Contracts \xa7 224 (Am. Law Inst. 1981); accord IDT Corp. v. Tyco Grp., 13 N.Y.3d 209, 214 (2009); Oppenheimer & Co. v. Oppenheim, Appel, Dixon & Co.,  86 N.Y.2d 685, 690 (1995).] While no particular words are necessary to  create a condition, the words \u201cif\u201d or \u201cprovided,\u201d as well as the phrases  \u201cprovided that,\u201d \u201con condition that,\u201d \u201cin the event that\u201d usually  connote an intent for a condition rather than a promise. [13 Samuel Williston & Richard A. Lord, Williston on Contracts \xa7 38:16 (4th ed. 1990, updated 2019); accord MHR Capital Partners LP v. Presstek, Inc., 12 N.Y.3d 640, 645 (2009)].

The violation of a condition precedent precludes recovery. [Gordon v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 163 N.W. 956, 957 (Mich. 1917); Yeo v. State Farm Ins. Co., 555 N.W.2d 893, 895 (Mich. Ct. App. 1996).\u201d Durasevic v. Grange Ins. Co. of Mich. (6th Cir., 2019)]