A personal accident policy excludes injury 'directly or indirectly caused by' riot. Hurrying home along a dark back lane because a riot has closed his usual route, the insured trips on a kerb and breaks a leg. The claim is most likely:
Answer: excluded, as riot contributed even indirectly. The riot is what put him on the dark lane, so it is a remote contributory cause of the injury. An exclusion of loss 'directly or indirectly' caused by an excepted peril has been held to apply even where that peril was only a remote contributory factor, as in the decided case of an officer killed by a train in wartime.Why not the others:• covered, as riot was not the last cause: being last in time is not the test under this wording.• covered, as the fall was the proximate cause: the wording excludes losses where riot was only a remote contributory factor.• covered, as 'indirectly' adds nothing to 'directly': 'directly' alone adds nothing, but 'directly or indirectly' widens the exclusion.Watch out: Applying the normal proximate cause test to 'directly or indirectly' wording.Rule: 'Directly or indirectly' exclusions catch remote as well as proximate causes.Source: IA P1 Study Notes, 2024 Edition (8th ed., Nov 2024; for exams from 17 Feb 2025), 3.3.4, p. 3/9
Applying the normal proximate cause test to 'directly or indirectly' wording.
Practise more IIQE Paper 1 Principles of Insurance questions
Exam-style questions with worked answers, then full timed mocks. Free to start.
Build a daily practice habit — a few exam-style questions a day, with worked answers. Free to start.
Start practising →Original study material written to the public IIQE Paper 1 syllabus. Independent, not endorsed by the Insurance Authority or the VTC. Verify figures and rules against current guidance before relying on them.