The extrajudicial claim against the insured interrupts the prescription period against the insurer

October 28 , 2022 // Legal Reforms and Debate

Published in INESE

The First Chamber of the Supreme Court determines that, since the liability of the insurer that is demanded through direct action is presumed to be the responsibility of the insured, the extrajudicial claim against the latter also interrupts the prescription regarding the insurer.

This was determined by the High Court in a recent ruling, commented on in the November issue of RC magazine, in which it indicates that the solidarity between the insured and the insurer does not derive from the act that produces the damage, but from the pre-existing link between both parties, since the insurance entity does not concur with its conduct to the production of the damage, but ensures its coverage thanks to the insurance contract.

Determines that the contract is not terminated due to non-payment of the insured's premium, considering, mainly, that non-payment of the premium had not been proven by the insurer at the time the claim is understood to have occurred, as soon as the damages are detected. construction defects and not when the conviction was handed down, four years later.

If it points to the fact that if the claim had occurred during the period of suspension of the contract as a result of non-payment of the fractional premium, the insurer would have had to respond to the third party, while if it had occurred after the tacit termination of the same once the 6 months have elapsed since the non-payment, that party would have been released from making the payment both to the insured and to the injured third party.