Essay on The Owner May Not Have Been An Additional Insured
As stated in Part III(A), supra, insurance policies are contracts, and are to be governed by ordinary principles of contract interpretation. In determining any rights that the owner may have under the policy, we must first identify the scope of the contract at issue, and then identify its terms. For the reasons stated below, the owner will likely argue that is a party to the contract at issue, and that if he is not, the contract should be reformed to include him as an additional insured.
1. Identifying the Contract
You have also asked whether the owner can assert that he is insured under the terms of the policy issued to Rumba. In arguing that the owner has an interest and an additional insured under the policy, the owner will likely argue that—although omitted from the declarations page—the application listing the owner as an additional insured was an offer that was accepted by the insurer, and therefore, he is an additional insured under the contract.
In Twelve Knotts Ltd. P’ship v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co., 87 Md. App. 88 (1991), in preliminary discussions with an insurer, an insured negotiated for a three-year guarantee that an insurance premium would not increase during that time. Id. at 94. The insurance policy that was ultimately issued, however, had no such provision. Id. at 94-95. Thereafter, the insured made a claim against the insurer for a breach of contract, where he alleged that the contents of their…