Can my insurer void my policy for misrepresentation?

What you had to disclose

The duty does not extend to everything, but to circumstances known to you and likely to materially influence an insurer in setting the premium, assessing the risk, or deciding to accept it.

You are not required to disclose what the insurer knows or is presumed to know by reason of notoriety — except in answer to a question put to you (article 2408). That is the nuance that matters: a specific question calls for an accurate answer.

What you did not know in good faith is not a misrepresentation. A construction defect you had no idea about falls outside the duty.

Nullity or reduction: the decisive distinction

Article 2410 allows nullity at the insurer's request, even for losses unconnected to the misrepresented risk. Read alone, the rule looks crushing.

But article 2411 tempers it substantially in damage insurance. The insurer remains liable for the indemnity, reduced in the proportion between the premium it collected and the premium it should have collected — subject to two conditions: that your bad faith is not established, and that it does not show it would not have accepted the risk had it known.

In other words, an insurer relying on nullity has an additional step to clear. Many denials stop at article 2410 and never engage with 2411.

Bad faith is not presumed

Everything shifts to your state of mind when you made the declaration. An omission in good faith, a misunderstood box, an ambiguous question, or a form completed by the broker do not amount to bad faith.

Look at how the question was worded. A form asking "have you ever made a claim?" with no period specified, or an application completed by phone by a representative who summarised your answers, weakens the insurer's position considerably.

Ask for a copy of the signed application and of the questions as they were put to you. That is the document insurers produce least readily.

What the insurer must show

To obtain nullity rather than a reduction, the insurer must establish either your bad faith, or that it would not have accepted this risk had it known.

That second point is not an assertion: it rests on its own underwriting rules at the time. If the insurer routinely wrote comparable risks, the argument is hard to sustain.

Insist that the reason for denial be in writing and cite the clauses and the facts relied on. A denial that simply says "misrepresentation" says neither which one nor why it was material.

Life insurance: the two-year rule

This is the most powerful provision in the chapter, and it does not apply to damage insurance.

In insurance of persons, absent fraud, a misrepresentation or concealment regarding the risk cannot found the nullity or reduction of insurance that has been in force for two years (article 2424). After that, the insurer can no longer reopen an inaccuracy in the application unless it establishes fraud.

One exception applies: the rule does not cover disability insurance where the disability began during the first two years of the contract.

So where a life insurer denies a claim by pointing at the application, the first question is the date: how long had the policy been in force?

Deadlines

The claim against the insurer generally prescribes after three years (article 2925). Your policy separately imposes notice obligations that are often far shorter.

Do not let a file sleep because the denial looks final. The distinction between nullity and reduction is arguable, and it often changes the outcome.