Facts
On December 15, 1978, X. concluded an insurance contract with Y. General Insurance covering carpets stored at the Geneva Free Port. On October 8, 1993, the police noted the theft of these carpets, most likely committed between June 15, 1992 and October 8, 1993. The loss was reported to the insurer on October 12, 1993, who refused to indemnify the insured, considering that the damage did not result from a break-in and that the carpets were no longer stored in a hermetically sealed room.
X. sued the insurer on October 5, 1995 to obtain compensation for his loss. The court of first instance granted his claim, but the Court of Justice of the Canton of Geneva annulled this judgment and dismissed all of X.'s conclusions, on the grounds that his action was time-barred.
Seized of the insured's appeal for reform, the Federal Tribunal dismissed the appeal to the extent that it was admissible and confirmed the challenged judgment.
Considerations
The Federal Tribunal considered that the limitation period under Art. 46 para. 1 of the Insurance Contract Act (LCA) in the matter of theft insurance begins to run from the occurrence of the loss, and not from the moment when the insured had or should have had knowledge of the theft. This interpretation is in line with the legislator's intention to have the limitation period begin at a precise moment, and not based on the insured's knowledge of the facts.
Furthermore, the Federal Tribunal held that the diligent insured can prevent his claim from becoming time-barred before he becomes…