Ceylinco General Insurance Ltd vs. Hon Attorney General – SC APPEAL NO: 170/2019-2022

In the case between the Attorney General (on behalf of the State) and Ceylinco General Insurance Ltd., the court addressed the issue of whether a demand under an advance payment bond was made within its validity period, and whether a unilateral alteration by the plaintiff (via document P6) constituted a valid and enforceable extension of the bond’s validity. It was determined that the purported alteration did not extend the validity period of the bond and that the demand was not made within the stipulated time. The decision reaffirmed the principle that unilateral actions cannot alter the terms of performance bonds, emphasizing the autonomous and strict nature of such instruments under national and international law. Reliance was placed on established authorities concerning performance bon