You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

September 7, 2012

Taking a Look at Myths and Truths in the Life Insurance Industry

Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

The business of life insurance today in Thailand is very competitive. Insurance companies advertise heavily via radio, TV, newspapers, websites, billboards, and other media channels, attempting to convince consumers that purchasing an insurance policy is a simple and quick thing to do.

For example, consumers may be able to purchase a life insurance policy over the internet or phone without meeting with an insurance broker in person. This convenient way of entering into insurance contracts leads to carelessness, whether intentionally or unintentionally, in disclosing all relevant facts. It also gives insurance companies the opportunity to refuse coverage or payment under a policy in the future.

In practice, the insurance company will ask the applicant to complete a form in which the applicant must declare all health and medical information and other important facts. Providing untrue or half-true information or failing to disclose important facts could release the insurance company from liability under the policy.

The insured person is responsible for disclosing all facts that would affect the insurer’s decision regarding coverage and insurance premiums. Section 865 of the Civil and Commercial Code (CCC) stipulates the following:

If at the time of making the contract, the assured, or, in case of insurance on life, the person upon whose life or death the payment of the sum payable depends, knowingly omits to disclose facts that would have induced the insurer to raise the premium or to refuse to enter into the contract or knowingly makes false statements in regard to such facts, the contract is voidable.

If such right of avoidance is not exercised within one month from the time when the insurer has knowledge of the ground of avoidance or within five years from the date of the contract, such right is extinguished.

The law does not define the facts that “would have induced the insurer to raise the premium or to refuse to enter into the contact.” However, the Supreme Court has decided that such facts include the following:

  • Health and medical information. The insurance company will demand a higher premium or refuse coverage if the insured person has a serious disease such as HIV/Aids, cancer, chronic renal disease, diabetes or cardiac disease.
  • Capacity to pay the premium. Capacity to pay the insurance premium is a factor that may affect an insurance company’s decision to cover an individual. The Supreme Court made this ruling in the context of a case where the insured person made false statements regarding his career and falsely confirmed he paid the premium himself. In fact, the insured was unemployed, and someone else paid the premium.

Health and medical information is the most important factor. However, there are limits on the instances when an insurance company can deny coverage for reasons of nondisclosure of medical information.

In Dika Decision 2295/2545, the Supreme Court determined the insurance company was still liable under the life insurance policy even though it found after the insured’s death that the insured did not reveal he suffered from hypoglycaemia and had been admitted to the hospital several times for that condition. The insurer informed the court that if it had known of the health condition, it would have refused to insure this person.

Nevertheless, the Supreme Court held that revealing such a health problem would not have caused the insurance company to refuse coverage, as the insured’s death was due to a motorcycle accident and not derived from his health problem. In addition, the insurer’s doctor had completed a checkup of the insured person and made no comment.

An insurance company is also entitled to void or terminate a policy within one month from the date that the said information becomes known to the company, according to the second paragraph of Section 865 of the CCC. This provision was tested in Dika Decision 4379/2530, in which the Supreme Court held that the insurer was still liable under the policy, as it did not terminate or void the contract within one month after discovering the insured person had falsely confirmed he was healthy and did not disclose he had epilepsy.

If the insurer in this case had exercised its right of avoidance within one month from the date of knowing the false information, then it would not have been required to pay compensation under the insurance policy.

In sum, the consumer should take care to reveal all important information regarding his or her health or medical history and capacity to pay premiums before entering into any life insurance contract. This is to prevent the contract from being voidable.

The promptness and ease in obtaining a life insurance policy may not guarantee that the insured or beneficiary will be compensated promptly and easily when filing a claim for compensation under said policy.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

January 12, 2023
Experts from Tilleke & Gibbins’ corporate and commercial team have written the Vietnam chapter of Practical Law’s Insurance and Reinsurance Global Guide, a Q&A-style overview of insurance and reinsurance law in dozens of jurisdictions worldwide. The guide covers: Market trends Regulatory framework and relevant legislation Authorization for insurers, reinsurers, and intermediaries, and ownership restrictions Ongoing requirements and penalties for non-compliance Sales and marketing Transfer of risk Reinsurance contracts and risks Contracts and policies Claims Dispute resolution Insolvency Tax InsurTech Reform To read the Vietnam chapter, please visit the Practical Law website or click on the link below.
December 26, 2022
Tilleke & Gibbins’ insurance specialists in Yangon have contributed the Myanmar overview to the Insurance and Reinsurance Global Guide, published by Thomson Reuters Practical Law. The guide is a Q&A-style overview of insurance and reinsurance law, with entries from legal experts in 47 jurisdictions worldwide. Tilleke & Gibbins’ Myanmar contribution provides a comprehensive look at the market for insurance and reinsurance in the country, and it covers the following topics: Market trends Regulatory framework Authorization – Laws and bodies, insurance intermediaries, exemptions and foreign insurers, fronting, legal forms, restrictions and insurance activities Ownership restrictions Ongoing requirements Penalties for noncompliance Sales and marketing Transfer of risk Reinsurance contracts and risk Contracts and policies – Content requirements and common clauses, implied terms, customer protections, standard policies or terms Claims – Establishing a claim, time limits, subrogation, third-party claims, insurance of punitive damages, remedies for breach of policy Dispute resolution Insolvency Tax Insurtech The Q&A closes with a brief update on the new draft Insurance Business Law to reform the Myanmar insurance market. Practical Law brings together guides to key legal practice areas around the world for business lawyers. Tilleke & Gibbins contributes many overviews on various legal practice areas for all of the firm’s jurisdictions in Southeast Asia. To read the full Myanmar overview, please visit the Practical Law website.
September 19, 2022
Tilleke & Gibbins’ insurance specialists in Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam have contributed to the Subrogated Recoveries – Asia Pacific guide produced by RPC Premier Law Firm. The guide addresses how insurers can recover indemnifiable losses. For each jurisdiction in the Asia Pacific region, the guide addresses the following topics: Local legal framework on subrogation; Insurers’ right to subrogate; Investigations prior to subrogated proceedings; Limitation period for subrogated action; Responsibility for costs in subrogated action; Enforcement of judgements for insurers; and Subrogated actions against co-insured parties. The Subrogated Recoveries – Asia Pacific guide is available below.
September 1, 2022
On June 2, 2022, Thailand’s Office of Insurance Commission (OIC) issued Notification No. 6 Re: Investments in Other Business Operations for both life and non-life insurance companies. The two notifications, which took effect upon issuance, strengthen the OIC’s supervision of investments by insurance companies, with a focus on basic infrastructure relevant to the promotion of business competition and sustainability, and also allow and regulate additional investment types. Internal Governance of Investment Activities An insurance company’s board of directors is required to appoint a credit committee when engaging in credit activities. These activities include providing loans (excluding personal loans to employees or loans made under a guarantee by its insurance policies), car leasing services, avals for bills of exchange, and letters of guarantee for project performance. The credit committee has the following duties: Preparing the credit policy framework for the credit activities described above for further board approval; Supervising the credit activities; Overseeing good corporate governance, transparency, and prevention of conflict of interest in relation to credit activities; Ensuring that the work system, manpower, and data in relation to credit activities are sufficient; and Regularly reporting to the board of directors regarding credit activities. Credit policies must at least cover: Procedures and conditions for credit transactions. These include risk management, internal controls, data storage, and written reporting requirements. The procedures and conditions must comply with the relevant OIC regulations and the Bank of Thailand’s minimum standards for financial institutions. Persons responsible for operations relating to credit work, risk management for credit transactions, and verification of credit transactions. These roles include (1) the credit analyst, (2) the person who approves appropriate credit transactions, (3) the verifier of work accuracy after a credit transaction is approved, (4) the person in charge of reporting credit transaction risks, and (5) the person responsible for