FS2008C: Law of Financial Services & quot;Looking at the case of Pan Atlantic, discuss whether cases subsequent to this decision have clarified or obscured the issues of ''material fact'' and ''influencing judgment''. & quot; 1000 words PAN ATLANTIC -v- PINE TOP: "Would you actually have offered the same terms of c The House of Lords gave its long-awaited judgment in Pan Atlantic v Pine Top in July 1994. In a 67-page ruling with serious and immediate implications for insurers and reinsurers, 200 years of insurance case law have been reviewed and reinterpreted. Key parts of the 1994 decision of the Court of Appeal in CTI v Oceanus have been overruled. The balance and burden between insured and insurer, cedant and reinsurer have shifted. The Pan Atlantic dispute arose from efforts by reinsurer Pine Top to avoid a policy covering Pan Atlantic''s 1977-1982 Casualty Account. Argument centred on disclosure of Pan Atlantic''s claims history prior to the 1982 year of account. The House of Lords upheld Pine Top''s right to avoid for the 1982 year, but introduced into the law a rule allowing the insured to defeat the underwriter''s right to avoid by proving that, had the underwriter known the true full facts, he would probably have offered the business anyway on the same terms as he in fact did. In summary, avoidance for non-disclosure or misrepresentation of a material fact or facts will now be justified if: (a) the fact or circumstances alleged to have been misrepresented or withheld was "material" in the sense that a prudent underwriter would have wanted to know the full and true position in order to take it into account in deciding whether, and if so on what terms, to write the business; and (b) the requirement to make full and accurate disclosure has not been waived by the underwriter in the particular case; and (c) the misrepresentation or non-disclosure in question actually "inducted" the particular underwriter to subscribe to the particular risk on the particular terms offered; and (d) the right to avoid has not been lost by waiver, affirmation, estoppel or some other bar.