William Mcllroy Swindon v Quinn Insurance (18/07/2011) No dispute about an insurer's "liability in respect of a claim or the amount to be paid” could have arisen until the insured's liability to...
William Mcllroy Swindon v Quinn Insurance (18/07/2011) No dispute about an insurer's "liability in respect of a claim or the amount to be paid” could have arisen until the insured's liability to third party claimants had been established by judgment, arbitration award or settlement.
Gard Marine v Lloyd Tunnicliffe (30/06/2011) The notation (100%) has a recognised meaning in the offshore energy market. When applied to an excess in a facultative reinsurance it meant the excess point would be adjusted to reflect the insured's interest in the relevant asset.
Heather Moor & Edgecomb v UK (14/06/2011) The Financial Ombudsman Service had not breached Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights by refusing a firm's application for an oral hearing.
Sienkiewicz v Greif (09/03/2011) Following Fairchild, a defendant in a mesothelioma claim would be liable if the negligent exposure materially increased the risk of the claimant developing the disease. This applied whether there was a single defendant or multiple defendants.
Sousa v Waltham Forest (11/03/2011) An insured bringing a subrogation claim under a conditional fee agreement was entitled to recover his lawyer’s success fee from the defendant, even though he had an indemnity from his insurer against costs.
AXA Seguros v Allianz (02/03/2011) Civil engineers’ reports commissioned by reinsurers after a loss were not subject to litigation privilege because they were not produced for the dominant purpose of litigation.
A stamp duty land tax (SDLT) anti avoidance provision applied to a series of transactions which included a sale of units in a Guernsey property unit trust (GPUT) and did not require a tax avoidance motive, the first tier tribunal has decided in a case involving Hannover Leasing. The anti avoidance provision in question, section 75A of Finance Act 2003, can increase the SDLT liability where a number of transactions are involved and less SDLT is payable than if the purchaser had just acquired the property directly from the seller.