Saville v Central Capital Ltd
Decision date: 24 March 2014
Neutral citation: [2014] EWCA Civ 337
Court: Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Insurance classification confidence: high
Overall AI summary confidence: medium
Short overview
A short description of the case, material issue, and outcome where supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this overview: medium
This appeal concerned the sale of a five‑year payment protection insurance (PPI) added to a loan and whether breaches of the Insurance Conduct of Business (ICOB) rules by the broker, Central Capital, caused loss to the borrowers. The Court of Appeal concluded that Central failed to elicit the Savilles’ genuine demands about policy term and that, on the evidence, the ICOB breaches were causative: the Savilles would not have bought the PPI as sold if the rules had been complied with. The appeal was allowed.
Ratio decidendi
The legal reasoning necessary to the outcome, where it can safely be identified from the judgment.
AI confidence in this ratio summary: medium
Where a broker has failed to comply with ICOB rules requiring an open and fair elicitation of the customer’s demands and needs, and the evidence shows the customer would not have purchased the product had those requirements been met, the broker’s breach can be causative of loss.
Obiter dicta
Judicial observations that were not necessary to the outcome, where they can safely be identified.
AI confidence in this obiter summary: medium
The court noted (without deciding) an inclination that, once suitability is fairly in issue, the burden of proof may lie on the intermediary to show compliance with the ICOB requirements.
Warning
The automated summary was prepared from selected parts of a longer judgment; consult the original decision for the complete reasoning. The middle of the judgment text was omitted, which may limit access to full factual detail and intermediate reasoning supporting these conclusions.