The wife of murdered businessman Mohamed Farouk Kalamadeen on Monday won a $200M judgment against CLICO Life and General Insurance Company which had refused to pay out an insurance claim on the grounds that the legality of his income was questionable and that he had deliberately furnished the insurance company with false information.
Kalamadeen, the then owner of Jiffi Lubes was abducted and murdered in April 2008. His decapitated body was found on Cowan Street, Kingston. His head was subsequently found floating in the North Road Canal near his business place.
According to a press statement issued by Sase Gunraj, the attorney for Nariman Kalamadeen, it was Justice Rishi Persaud, sitting in the Commercial Division of the High Court who granted the favourable judgement.
He stated that the court action against Clico was instituted on the 20th day of February, 2009 by Nariman Kalamadeen, in her capacity as the Administratrix of the Estate of Mohamed Farouk Kalamadeen. The release stated that at the time of his death, Kalamadeen held a life insurance policy with CLICO Life and General Insurance Co. (S.A.) Ltd, and the company “refused, without explanation”, to honour a claim made by the Estate of Kalamadeen, despite all the requirements of the company being complied with.
It was stated that during the proceedings, Nariman Kalamadeen was represented by Gunraj and Senior Counsel Edward Luckhoo while Clico was represented by Senior Counsel Ashton Chase.
According to Gunraj several witnesses, including a representative of CLICO (Trinidad) and former CEO,. Geeta Singh-Knight testified on behalf of the Defendant (Clico).
The Judge, according to him found that the evidence led by the Defendant fell short of establishing material non-disclosure and fraud, as was alleged; there was no proof of materiality; the issue of non-disclosure on the part of the deceased was not pleaded by the Defendant and that the Defendant never rescinded the policy or returned premiums, but instead affirmed same.
As a consequence, Gunraj said judgment was granted to the Plaintiff (Nariman Kalamadeen) in the sum of $200,000,000 with costs in the sum of $500,187.50.
Upon an application by the Defendant, the execution of the judgment was stayed for 4 weeks, the attorney said.
About a month after the businessman was killed, the family attorney, Bibi Shadick, wrote to Clico informing of his demise and provided a copy of the death certificate.
Shadick was also seeking to have a perfect inventory of the assets of Kalamadeen’s estate and requested that Clico provide her with a full statement of all benefits due to the estate under the policy of insurance to facilitate her application for a grant of letters of administration. But Clico subsequently wrote to Shadick, asking her to note that payment of benefits would be based on formal submission of the requisite claims, documents and subject to satisfactory proof of entitlement to receive payments in keeping with the terms and conditions under the policy.
Clico then later wrote to Nariman Kalamadeen, the wife of the deceased, informing her that the estate’s death claim had been denied. This prompted the woman to take to matter to the court but after this process was initiated the insurance company filed legal proceedings to bar the Insurance Arbitration Board from arbitrating a complaint by Kalamadeen’s family in January. Clico managed to secure an interim order. The company collapsed 2009 after enduring financial difficulties. The company has since been dissolved.
In her statement of claim, the woman said that her husband did not commit suicide or die by capital punishment, occurrences which would limit the liability of Clico to an amount equal to premiums which have been received.
She added that in keeping with an Incontestability Clause contained in the Policy of Insurance, at the time of her husband’s death the policy had been in force for over two years and all the premiums had been fully paid.
In her documents she maintained that for no reason the company was refusing to pay the claim.
Singh-Knights in her affidavit of defence had said the company would reject and continue to reject the claim being made on the grounds that the financial informational furnished was deliberately falsified. “This touched such matters as the insured’s financial investments, net worth, income and banking position. The inspired also held a policy with a foreign Company – American Fidelity – and a comparison of the data furnished to the Defendant and this latter company speaks volumes as to differences. The defendant’s local bankers will also support the Defendant’s position and support the fact that the insured made false misrepresentation to the defendant”, legal documents signed by Singh-Knights read.
She stated that in the wife’s application for Letters of Administration she “who claims to be in charge of all affairs of the Insured has not declared the American Fidelity insurance policy and the sum received or to be received under it to the local authorizes”. Singh-Knight’s defence stressed that the company is not indebted to Nariman Kalamadeen in the sum being claimed or any sum. “The defendant contends that in the circumstances it is legally entitled to avoid the Policy in issue”.
Based on the documents seen by this newspaper Clico claims that on December 31, 2005 the businessman had given his total assets as $155, 600.000 and his net worth at $146,920,435.00 compared with a net worth of US$6M about a year later. This the documents said “raised consideration on the legality of his source of income”. It was further stated that he stated that his then annual salary was just over $24M in 2005 to be $26M in 2006, clearly falsified in light of the aforementioned information.
According to the documents the businessman failed to disclose a $246M loan that was approved by a city bank in February 2006. He also failed to disclose two life policies which have a combined worth of US$400, 000.
