Shané Ganswyk

Full Profile

Shané is a Senior Associate in our Johannesburg office and has been part of the property / assets insurance practice team since September 2017.

Shané advises  major local insurers in relation to coverage disputes / policy response and is involved in general insurance litigation.  

Shané obtained both her BCom Law degree and LLB degree from the University of Pretoria and was admitted as an attorney of the High Court of South Africa in 2015.

Shané’s practice predominantly focuses on assets / property insurance which includes aspects of policy response, cause investigation, advising on and defending rejected claim, considering and pursuing subrogated recoveries and providing assistance with subrogated defences. 

Shané has experience with fire claims, business interruption claims, review of policy wording, professional indemnity claims, employer’s liability, medical malpractice and third-party claims. 

Experience

• COVID-19 related business interruption losses – To advise major local insurers on policy coverage for infectious and contagious diseases following the outbreak of COVID-19 and Government imposed lockdown regulations. We also had to advise on issues surrounding quantification of the losses

• Veldfire causing destructive damage to plantation – Investigating and advising insurers on a subrogated recovery action following a veldfire which caused destructive damage to its insured's plantation to the value of R139 million. Indications are that the fire was caused due to the poor construction and/or maintenance of a power line.

• Renewable Energy Policy wording – Advising an insurer on coverage dispute in relation to a Renewable Energy Policy wording and defending an action instituted against the insurer by its insured, following the failure of the insured's wind turbines situated in the Eastern Cape.

• Defending Employer's Liability claim following a dog bite incident – Defending a subrogated Employer Liability claim on the basis that the plaintiff's claim was disqualified by the provisions of the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act. Judgment was given in favour of the employer (we represented the employer's insurer).

• Rejection of insurance claim following the hijack of a building – Defending an action instituted against the insurer by the insured for damage suffered to the insured property following the hijack of the building.

• R62 million insurance claim for collapsed roof – Advising an insurer on coverage dispute in relation to an Asset Policy following the collapse of the roof. The insurance claim was rejected on the basis that the roof collapse was caused by defective design. We also defended the subsequent action which the insured instituted against the insurer.

• Professional Indemnity claim against broker – To defend a professional indemnity claim instituted by an insured against the broker for damage suffered due to underinsurance. We also had to investigate when the debt arose for purposes of the Prescription Act.

• Misdiagnosis of patient – To defend action instituted against a doctor following the alleged misdiagnosis and treatment of a patient.

• Personal injury following a slip incident – To defend action instituted against policyholder for personal injuries suffered by a third party following an incident which occurred at the insured's premises when the third party slipped and fell on wet tiles.