ABSTRACT
An insurer's liability could therefore be discharged for breach of a burglar alarm warranty where the actual loss was caused by a storm or a fire. Under Norwegian law, the insurer was liable to pay the claim on the primary insurance. However, the reinsurance was governed by English law, and the reinsurer argued that it was not liable in view of the breach of warranty. The Law Commissions considered that a more permanent and comprehensive solution was required, which is now seen in section 11 of the Act. Although borne of the Law Commissions' dissatisfaction with warranties, section 11 applies to a substantially wider range of risk mitigation terms. In its Report of 1980, the Law Commission criticised as unjust the fact that an insurer could reject a claim for breach of warranty no matter how irrelevant the breach may have been to the loss.
