A “blot on English insurance law”

Insurers successfully avoided a policy on the grounds of inadvertent non-disclosure. The High Court commented on the different outcome that would have been available under the Insurance Act 2015 which comes in to force in August 2016, remarking that the stringent remedy of avoidance under the present law remains a "blot on English insurance law".  Read more

Privy Council decision on limitation in professional negligence cases

A recent Privy Council decision has considered the point at which damage is suffered where a claimant has entered into a flawed transaction as a result of a defendant’s professional negligence. This is a controversial issue of particular relevance where claims are brought long after the negligent acts were committed. The court’s conclusion will often … Read more

Supreme Court confirms employer’s liability insurers have a right to seek contribution from the insured and other insurers in mesothelioma claims

An employer which exposes an employee to asbestos creating a risk of mesothelioma is, as matter of English law, treated as causing later contracted mesothelioma.  As a result of the Compensation Act 2006, the employer and thus its Employer's Liability ("EL") insurer, is liable for the full amount of its insured's liability for mesothelioma so … Read more

Court of Appeal reaffirms that rights of recovery and subrogation in situations of joint insurance will depend upon the terms of the underlying contractual relationship

In the recent cases of Gard Marine & Energy Ltd v China National Chartering Co Ltd and China National Chartering Co Ltd v Daiichi Chuo Kisen Kaishai [2015] EWCA Civ 16 (heard together) the Court of Appeal overturned the first instance decision of Mr Justice Teare, finding that there had been no breach of safe … Read more

Court of Appeal implies waiver of subrogation

In Rathbone Brothers plc v Novae Corporate Underwriting [2014] EWCA Civ 1464, the Court of Appeal confirmed that an individual engaged in a consultancy agreement with the policyholder of a professional liability insurance policy was covered by the policy notwithstanding that he was a consultant rather than an employee. The judgment at first instance was … Read more