If a condition precedent to liability is breached, how will the insurer react to the connected claim?

When a condition precedent to liability is breached, the typical response from the insurer is to repudiates the claim but keep the contract in force. A condition precedent is a specific requirement that must be met before an insurer can be liable for a claim. If this condition is not satisfied, the insurer is not obliged to pay the claim. However, this does not automatically result in the termination of the insurance policy itself.

By choosing to repudiate the claim while maintaining the contract, the insurer can continue to operate under the terms of the policy for future claims, provided that the conditions of the contract are met going forward. This approach aligns with the principles of insurance which often allow for the policy to remain intact despite a breach, as long as it wasn't a fundamental breach that would justify termination of the entire contract. Therefore, it shows that the insurer recognizes the ongoing obligations and may uphold the relationship with the policyholder for future coverage, pending compliance with all terms.

In contrast, the other options suggest various forms of termination or outright rejection that may not reflect the common practice in dealing with breaches of conditions precedent. Each of those would alter the ongoing contract relationship, while the chosen response allows the insurer to maintain coverage for the future while addressing the specific claim situation.