Insurance advisory in Georgia is grounded in precise knowledge of the framework within which an insurance contract is concluded, amended and terminated — and at the centre of that framework stand Articles 800, 805, 808 and 809 of the Civil Code. This page explains who may act as the policyholder's representative and what powers that person holds, when an insurer is obliged to conclude the contract at all, and which information the policyholder must supply. Licensing-heavy regulatory models familiar from foreign insurance markets are not replicated in Georgia's civil-law framework — the page is carried entirely by the Georgian Civil Code.
The insurance agent and the agent's powers
Article 805 of the Civil Code defines the boundaries of representation. If an insurance agent — a representative — is authorised to conclude an insurance contract, the agent may also amend the terms of the contract, extend its term or terminate it. The agent's authority is therefore not confined to a single act: the power to conclude carries with it the ability to vary, prolong and dissolve. Under the second part of the same article, an insurance agent who performs the function of an intermediary in the conclusion of an insurance contract has the right to conclude such a contract. At the advisory level this raises two practical questions: whether the agent's function — representation or intermediation — has been made clear, and whether the specific transaction falls within the scope of the conferred authority.
When the insurer is obliged to conclude the contract
Article 800 subjects contractual freedom to a significant constraint: a person who publicly offers the conclusion of an insurance contract is obliged to conclude that contract unless a significant ground for refusal exists. On the health and accident insurance market this norm is particularly consequential: a publicly published offer is no longer merely an invitation, and the insurer must ground any refusal in a significant reason. In an advisory engagement the first things recorded are whether the offer was public and what ground the refusal invoked.
The policyholder's duty to supply information
Article 808 imposes a strict informational obligation on the policyholder. When concluding the contract, the policyholder must notify the insurer of all circumstances known to the policyholder that are materially significant for the occurrence of the risk or of the event covered by the insurance. Circumstances are material where they are capable of influencing the insurer's decision — to refuse the contract or to conclude it with altered content. Under the same article, a circumstance about which the insurer questions the policyholder in writing, clearly and unambiguously, is likewise deemed material. Where a material circumstance is not communicated contrary to these rules, the insurer may refuse the contract; the same consequence follows where the policyholder deliberately avoided notifying material circumstances.
The norm nonetheless contains a protective mechanism: termination of the contract is inadmissible where the insurer knew of the concealed circumstances, or where the policyholder is not at fault for failing to notify them. Advisory work therefore concentrates on what was known to the insurer and which questions were posed in writing — on these two circumstances the outcome of any subsequent dispute turns.
The consequences of incorrect data
Article 809 addresses incorrect data. The insurer may refuse the contract even where the notification concerning material circumstances contains incorrect data. Refusal is inadmissible where the inaccuracy of the data was known to the insurer, or where the policyholder is not at fault for supplying incorrect data. Within one month of the notification of this data the insurer may terminate the contract. That window is one of the most important parameters in advisory practice: a contract impaired by erroneous data is vulnerable only for a defined period, and once the month has run the right to terminate disappears.
What an insurance advisory engagement covers
The engagement begins by fixing the parties' status — whether the contract is being concluded through an agent and in which function, representative or intermediary. Next, the fact of a public offer is verified, together with the duty to conclude under Article 800. A separate block is the audit of informational obligations: what is being notified to the insurer, which questions were posed in writing, and whether there is a risk that data will be assessed as incorrect. Finally, timing is evaluated — including the one-month termination window that runs from the notification of incorrect data. The result of these stages is a complete picture of how robust the planned or already concluded contract is.
Frequently asked questions
Below are the questions most frequently raised in insurance advisory engagements.
Can an agent terminate the contract?
Yes — an agent authorised to conclude the contract may under Article 805 also amend its terms, extend its term and terminate it.
Is the insurer obliged to conclude the contract?
Where the insurer publicly offers conclusion, yes — under Article 800 refusal is admissible only where a significant ground exists.
What happens if the notification contains incorrect data?
Under Article 809 the insurer may refuse the contract, but may terminate it only within one month of the notification of the data; refusal is inadmissible where the inaccuracy was known to the insurer or the policyholder is not at fault.
How We Help on Legal.ge
The specialists of Legal.ge assist in verifying an agent's authority, assessing the duty to conclude arising from a public offer, and auditing informational obligations — grounded in Articles 800, 805, 808 and 809 of the Civil Code. Contact us through the request form on this page and receive a concrete assessment of your insurance transaction.