Sect. 520. insurances, there is no clause determining the end of the risk on freight. Usually the freight is not payable until the goods are delivered. When this is so, it is submitted that, under a voyage policy to the place of discharge, the risk continues as long as the goods remain in the custody of the shipowner exposed to maritime perils, provided there be no unjustifiable delay in discharging them (ƒ). Time policy on freight. 521. Freight is often insured by time policies. So far as the duration of the risk is concerned, the rules relating to time policies on ships are applicable to insurances on freight (g). In one case it was argued that a loss of freight could not be recovered because the voyage, if there had been no loss, would not have been completed within the time for which the insurance had been effected; for the freight could not be earned during the time covered by the insurance. But this absurd contention was overruled. It was held that as freight can be insured for a part of a voyage, so also it can be for a limited period, during which it is at risk (h). (f) Marshall, 225. Where the freight of a voyage from London to Madeira and Jamaica was agreed to be paid in wine to be put on board at Madeira, the Court of Common Pleas were of opinion that the risk under a policy on freight at and from London to Jamaica endured until the freight wine was safely carried to Jamaica in the ship. Atty v. Lindo (1805), 1 B. & P. N. R. 236. (g) See ante, Chap. XVI. (h) Michael v. Gillespie (1857), 2 C. B. N. S. 627; 26 L. J. C. P. 306. concealment 522. In almost every instance in which a policy of sea Of misrepreassurance is effected, the underwriter must rely solely on the sentation and good faith of the assured for supplying him with full and generally. true information of many of those facts on which the character and nature of the risk, and consequently the rate of premium, depends. It is to the assured that all communications respecting the actual state of the property proposed for insurance, such as the time and place at which the goods are to be loaded, or the ship is to sail-the force and equipment of the vessel, her then situation, and progress in her voyage, &c.— are in the first instance addressed: he is thus the natural and sole depositary of much of that information, a full and true communication of which is absolutely essential to the underwriter in order that he may form a right judgment of the nature of the risk and the proper rate of premium. VOL. I. R R Sect. 522. Misrepresentation or concealment after slip initialed has no effect on contract. Hence, on the true principles of equity and justice, the concealment or misrepresentation by the assured (a), whether wilful or not, of any facts which were calculated to influence, and did in fact influence, the underwriter (b) in taking the risk or fixing the rate of premium will give the latter the right to avoid (c) the policy. The contract, as it has often been said, is eminently a contract uberrimæ fidei-to be made, i.e., in the utmost good faith (d). We have already seen that, although there is no enforceable contract until a policy complying with the requirements of the Stamp Act has been issued, the contract is, according to the usage of underwriters, complete as soon as the slip has been initialed. This usage is recognized by the Courts in questions of misrepresentation or concealment. Consequently any representation made by one of the parties to the other after the slip has been initialed is of no effect on a policy made to express the contract embodied in the slip, although such policy be drawn up and executed after the representation was made. Similarly the non-disclosure of a fact which has come to the knowledge of one of the parties between the initialing of the slip and the execution of the policy will not vitiate the contract (e). (a) It was pointed out by Lord Mansfield in Carter v. Boehm (1766), 1 W. Bl. 594; 3 Burr. 1909, that, as regards concealment at least, and it seems to follow as regards representations also, there is a corresponding obligation on the part of the underwriter, who, for instance, would not be allowed to retain a premium in respect of a policy made on a ship which he knew at the time to have arrived safely. This is no doubt true; but as his opportunities of misrepresenting or suppressing facts which would influence the assured are necessarily few, the language of the earlier editions has been followed, which is undoubtedly only applicable to an obligation on the part of the assured. See also the Marine Insurance Bill, 1899, s. 17. 66 (b) Arnould's words were (2nd ed. p. 541), any such facts as might reasonably be supposed to have influenced the underwriter," &c. The text has been altered for reasons which will hereafter be discussed. (c) Arnould's expression was, "will avoid the policy." See, however, post, s. 523. (d) See 3 Kent, Com. 282; 3 Boulay-Paty, Droit Mar. tit. x. 8. 14; Code de Commerce, art. 348; 3 Benecke, System des Assecuranz, c. 10. (e) Ionides v. Pacific Fire and Marine Ins. Co. (1871), L. R. 6 Q. B. 674; in the Ex. Ch. (1872), L. R. |