Case Number
CA 370/63
Date Decided
3-15-1964
Decision Type
Appellate
Document Type
Full Opinion
Abstract
The first appellant was involved in a traffic accident, for which he was partly responsible. as a result of which a number of persons were injured. The respondent, the insurer of the other vehicle, settled the claims of some of the injured in negotiations outside court, after having invited the appellants to join in the negotiations. The latter refused to do so nor did they make any contribution to the payments made by the respondent who sued for contribution. The appellant denied liability and applied for the action to be dismissed in limine for no cause of action.
Held. The right of contribution lies in Equity or quasi-contract and not in contract, since it would not be just for a party to be relieved from a financial burden and thus be enriched at the expense of another. The right is available whenever two people are liable in solidum and not necessarily jointly or jointly and severally. When two people are liable in respect of the same matter, the presumption, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, is that each must bear half of the liability, and if one pays more the other is unlawfully enriched at his expense. The underlying principle is flexible and therefore applicable to all kinds of different situations, irrespective of whether judgment has been obtained regarding liability of the person from whom contribution is claimed, provided it is to be anticipated that if action had been taken against him he would have been rendered liable
Keywords
Contracts -- Liability, Insurance -- Insurance Contract
Recommended Citation
Agranat, Shimon; Berinson, Zvi; and Olshan, Yitzhak, "Basset v. Hapol Compulsory Insurance Ltd." (1964). Translated Opinions. 83.
https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/iscp-opinions/83
