Gan Insurance Company Limited and Another v Tai Ping Insurance Company Limited: CA 28 May 1999

appeal from refusal to set aside service out of jurisdiction

Judges:

Mance LJ

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1524, [1999] Lloyd’s Rep IR 472, [1999] CLC 1270, [1999] 2 All ER (Comm) 54

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoGan Insurance Company Ltd v The Tai Ping Insurance Company Ltd (No 3) CA 1-Mar-2002
Tai Ping had placed facultative insurance with Gan. The substantial risks were re-insured through various agencies. When a claim arose it was repudiated alleging misrepresentation. Gan asserted that Tai Ping had failed to co-operate in the . .
See AlsoGan Insurance Co Ltd v Tai Ping Insurance Co Ltd CA 3-Jul-2001
A reinsurance contract which contained a clause which provided that no settlement or compromise of a claim could be made or liability admitted by the insured without the prior approval of the reinsurers. The court considered how the discretion to . .

Cited by:

See AlsoGan Insurance Co Ltd v Tai Ping Insurance Co Ltd CA 3-Jul-2001
A reinsurance contract which contained a clause which provided that no settlement or compromise of a claim could be made or liability admitted by the insured without the prior approval of the reinsurers. The court considered how the discretion to . .
See AlsoGan Insurance Company Ltd v The Tai Ping Insurance Company Ltd (No 3) CA 1-Mar-2002
Tai Ping had placed facultative insurance with Gan. The substantial risks were re-insured through various agencies. When a claim arose it was repudiated alleging misrepresentation. Gan asserted that Tai Ping had failed to co-operate in the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Jurisdiction

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146439

Cox v Bankside Members Agency Ltd and Others: CA 16 May 1995

Successful Lloyds names were entitled to enforce their claims in the normal time sequence. The transfer of the rights of the insured against the insurer under section 1(1) the 1930 Act takes place on the event of insolvency, even if the insured’s liability to the third party has not yet been established. In handling claims, instructing solicitors and so forth, the insurers act as agents for the company and are entitled to reimbursement for their expenses.
Lord Justice Saville said: ‘Under the Act the rights of the insured against the insurer are transferred to the third party on (in the case of an insured company) the making of a winding up order etc.: see s.1(b) of the Act. It follows from this that a statutory transfer can take place before the obligation of the insurer to pay arises i.e. before the liability of the insured has been established. In such an event, since it is clear from the authorities that the third party is to be put in no better position than the insured, the third party does not obtain the right to immediate payment until the liability of the insured is established. .
That right [the right of the third party to immediate payment by the insurers] only arises when, in each case, the claim is established, just as that right, while owned by the insured, would also arise only when the particular claim in question was established. It is only when that right arises that the insurers come under the correlative obligation to make payment. To my mind it follows that as each claim is established (whether before or after the statutory assignment), the right to payment arises and thus the amount of available insurance is in effect diminished, so that when it is exhausted later established claims have no right to an indemnity. . .’

Judges:

Lord Justice Saville

Citations:

Independent 09-Jun-1995, Times 16-May-1995, [1995] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 437

Statutes:

Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 1930 1(1)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromCox v Bankside Members Agency Ltd and Others QBD 27-Jan-1995
Some agents had policies against which there were likely to be various calls, either because several claims were being pursued against the same agents by different Lloyd’s Names, or because the policies were group policies covering several agents . .

Cited by:

CitedAXA Reinsurance (UK) Plc v Field HL 12-Sep-1996
The terms originating ’cause’ and ‘event’ are to be differently construed, one means a continuing situation and the other refers to a discrete event.
Under the ‘LMX Spiral’ Lloyds’ syndicates wrote substantial excess of loss business.The cross . .
CitedLloyds TSB General Insurance Holdings and others v Lloyds Bank Group Insurance Company Ltd HL 31-Jul-2003
The applicant had paid out many claims for mis-selling pensions. They sought to claim under their insurance. The claims met the requirements of the principle insurance, but the insurance companies sought to impose a limit by aggregation.
Held: . .
Dicta adoptedFirst National Tricity Finance Ltd v OT Computers Ltd; In re OT Computers Ltd (in administration) CA 25-May-2004
The company had gone into liquidation. They had sold consumer policies as extended warranties on behalf of the claimant. The company had insured its own joint liability under the contracts, and the claimant sought information from the company’s . .
CitedFreakley and Curzon Insurance Ltd v Centre Reinsurance International Company and Another; similar CA 11-Feb-2005
Claims were made for personal injury caused by asbestos. The re-insurers sought declaratory relief against the head insurers, and the administrators of the insolvent company. The administrators sought declarations in turn. Curzon insured the company . .
CitedFreakley and others v Centre Reinsurance International Company and others HL 11-Oct-2006
When it became clear that the company would be financially overwhelmed by asbestos related claims, a voluntary scheme of arrangement was proposed under s425. The House was now asked whether the right to re-imbursement of the company’s lawyers after . .
CitedTeal Assurance Company Ltd v WR Berkley Insurance (Europe) Ltd SC 31-Jul-2013
An international engineering company had several layers of professional indemnity insurance. The top later did not cover claims originating in the US or Canada. The several insurers now disputed apportionment of liability between them. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Insurance, Legal Professions

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.79585

Brown v KMR Services Ltd: CA 26 Jul 1995

Allied Maples had made a corporate takeover of assets and businesses within the Gillow group of companies, during which it was negligently advised by the defendant solicitors in relation to seeking protection against contingent liabilities of subsidiaries within the vendor’s group. Allied Maples would have been better off, competently advised, if, but only if: (a) it had raised the matter with Gillow and sought improved warranties and (b) Gillow had responded by providing them.
Held: Allied Maples had to prove point (a) on a balance of probabilities, but point (b) should be assessed upon the basis of loss of the chance that Gillow would have responded favourably.
The scale of losses alone did not make damages claim too remote if it was nevertheless foreseeable. Liability for damages for negligent advice depends upon type not scale of loss.
Claims against underwriters are separate for each year, set-off not allowed.

Judges:

Stuart-Smith, Hobhouse and Millett LJJ

Citations:

Times 26-Jul-1995, Gazette 15-Sep-1995, Independent 13-Sep-1995, [1995] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 513, [1995] 4 All ER 598

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromBrown v KMR Services Ltd; Sword-Daniels v Pitel and Others QBD 19-Apr-1994
A Lloyds agent who was asked to find a low risk syndicate has a duty to do so. . .

Cited by:

CitedTransfield Shipping Inc of Panama v Mercator Shipping Inc of Monrovia ComC 1-Dec-2006
The owners made substantial losses after the charterers breached the contract by failing to redliver the ship on time as agreed.
Held: On the facts found the Owners’ primary claim is not too remote. To the knowledge of the Charterers, it was . .
CitedPerry v Raleys Solicitors SC 13-Feb-2019
Veracity of a witness is for the court hearing him
The claimant, a retired miner, had sued his former solicitors, alleging professional negligence in the settlement of his claim for Vibration White Finger damages under the government approved scheme for compensation for such injuries. At trial, the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Damages

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.78703

Trust Risk Group Spa v AmTrust Europe Ltd: CA 30 Apr 2015

The appeal was as to a jurisdiction dispute arising from the breakdown of a business relationship about the placement of medical malpractice insurance in the Italian market. The underlying question was whether the contractual arrangements between TRG and ATEL consist of a single composite and overarching agreement, a ‘Framework Agreement’ to which an earlier agreement, a Terms of Business Agreement appended to it as a Schedule, is subordinate, or whether the Framework Agreement and the ToBA are two freestanding contracts.

Judges:

Elias, Beatson, Christopher Clarke LJJ

Citations:

[2015] EWCA Civ 437, [2016] 1 All ER (Comm) 325, [2017] 1 CLC 456, [2015] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 154

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromAmtrust Europe Ltd v Trust Risk Group Spa ComC 10-Dec-2014
The parties disputed sums said to be due under arrangements selling medical malpractice insurance in Italy.
Held: ATEL had a ‘good arguable case’ that the ToBA continued as an agreement and was not superseded by the ‘Framework Agreement’, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Jurisdiction, Contract

Updated: 31 December 2022; Ref: scu.546214

Mayall And Others v Mitford And Others: 2 May 1837

Action against insurers, on a fire insurance policy upon the machinery of cotton mills, containing a warranty that the mills should be worked by day only. Plea, that a steam engine and horizontal shafts, being parts of the mills, were without defendants’ consent worked by night, and not by day only. Held bad, on motion for judgment non obstante veredicto, as not shewing a breach of the warranty.

Citations:

[1837] EngR 687, (1837) 6 Ad and E 370, (1837) 112 ER 258

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Insurance

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.313804

PCW Syndicate v PCW Reinsurers: CA 8 Sep 1995

A policy was not avoided by the agent’s failure to disclose his own dishonesty with the principal. In this area there was no difference between the law of Marine Insurance and other insurances.

Citations:

Independent 08-Sep-1995, Times 10-Oct-1995, [1996] 1 WLR 1136

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHIH Casualty and General Insurance Limited and others v Chase Manhattan Bank and others HL 20-Feb-2003
The insurance company had paid claims on policies used to underwrite the production of TV films. The re-insurers resisted the claims against them by the insurers on the grounds of non-disclosure by the insured, or in the alternative damages for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.84618

Global Process Systems Inc and Another v Berhad: CA 17 Dec 2009

An oil rig suffered major damage in transit in rough seas. The insurers repudiated liability saying that the damages was the result of a natural vice rather than perils at sea.
Held: The fact that the sea conditions were within the range of what might be expected did not mean that the court must conclude that the loss was due to an inherent vice. However, in this case there were acknowledged difficulties with the structure, and these had not been addressed. The proximate cause of the loss was an insured peril in the form of the occurrence of a ‘leg breaking wave’, which resulted in the starboard leg breaking off, leading to greater stresses on the remaining legs, which then also broke off.

Judges:

Waller LJ VP, Carnwath LJ, Patten LJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 1398, [2010] Lloyd’s Rep IR 221, [2009] 2 CLC 1056, [2010] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 243

Links:

Bailii, Times

Statutes:

Marine Insurance Act 1906 39 40 55

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AnalysedMayban General Assurance Bhd, AMI Insurans Bhd, Malaysian International Insurance Bhd, Syarikat Takaful Malaysia Bhd v Alstom Power Plants Ltd, Alstom T and D Ltd QBD 11-May-2004
An electrical transformer was shipped from Ellesmere Port to Rotterdam and there transferred to a container vessel for carriage to Lumut. Severe weather was encountered, but not such as a commercial person would regard as falling outside the range . .
Appeal fromGlobal Process Sytems Inc and Another v Syarikat Takaful Malaysia Berhad ComC 31-Mar-2009
The Cendor MOPU
The insurance company had refused a claim after the failure of an oil rig, saying that the loss of the rig legs during transit was the inevitable consequence of the voyage, and that since insurance was against risks, not certainties, they were under . .
CitedNE Neter and Co Ltd v Licenses and General Insurance Co Ltd 1944
A cargo of casks and bags of china clay out-turned damaged, as a result of the stoving in of the casks on a voyage during which there had been heavy weather.
Held: The claim failed. The plaintiffs had not proved that the proximate cause of the . .
CitedSoya GmbH Mainz Kommanditgesellschaft v White CA 1982
Where insured goods deteriorated during a passage, not because they had been subjected to some external fortuitous accident or casualty, but because of their natural behaviour in the ordinary course of the voyage, then such deterioration amounted to . .
CitedSoya GmbH Mainz Kommanditgesellschaft v White HL 1983
The cargo, soya beans, was insured against heating, sweating and spontaneous combustion risks. It arrived in a heated and deteriorated condition. The insurers denied liability saying that the proximate cause of the damage was inherent vice or nature . .
CitedJ J Lloyd Instruments Limited v Northern Star Insurance Co Ltd; The Miss Jay Jay CA 1987
The insurers insured against an adverse sea but not against defective manufacture or design. Both were found to be proximate causes of the loss.
Held: The Court of Appeal upheld the first instance judge that the owners could claim under the . .
CitedJ J Lloyd Instruments Ltd v Northern Star Insurance Co Ltd ‘The Miss Jay Jay’ 1985
Mustill J considered liability under a marine insurance where damage was suffered when the sea state was within what might reasonably be anticipated: ‘The cases make it quite plain that if the action of the wind or sea is the immediate cause of the . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromGlobal Process Systems Inc and Another v Berhad SC 1-Feb-2011
An oil rig (The Cendor MOPU) was being transported from Texas to Malaysia. During the voyage, three of the four legs suffered damage. The insurers refused liability saying that the damage was the result of inherent weaknesses in the rig.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Transport

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.384330

Orakpo v Barclays Insurance Services and Another: CA 1995

The insured sought to claim under his policy. The insurance company declined any payment, saying that part of the claim was fraudulent.
Hoffmann LJ said: ‘In my view, the claim also fails on the ground that it was substantially fraudulent. The relevant principle is stated as follows by Malcolm Clark in his book, The Law of Insurance Contracts (1989), at p.43 ‘This proposition is supported by both principle and authority. In principle insurance is a contract of good faith. I do not see why the duty of good faith on the part of the assured should expire when the contract has been made. The reasons for requiring good faith continue to exist. Just as the nature of the risk will usually be within the peculiar knowledge of the insured, so will circumstances of the casualty, it will rarely be within the knowledge of the insurance company. I think that the insurance company should be able to trust the assured to put forward a claim in good faith. Any fraud in making the claim goes to the root of the contract and entitles the insurer to be discharged. One should naturally not readily infer fraud from the fact that the insured has made a doubtful or even exaggerated claim.”
Sir Roger Parker said: ‘The appellant submits that the law, in the absence of a specific clause, is that an insured may present a claim which is to his knowledge fraudulent to a very substantial extent, but yet may recover in respect of the part of the claim which cannot be so categorized. To accept this proposition involves holding that, although an insurance contract is one of utmost good faith, an assured may present a positively and substantially fraudulent claim without penalty, save that his claim will to that extent be defeated on the facts. He may yet, it is said, recover on the honest part of the claim. I would be unable to accept such a proposition without compelling authority and there is none.

Judges:

Staughton LJ Hoffmann LJ and Sir Roger Parker

Citations:

[1995] Ll RLR 443, [1995] Lloyd’s Rep IR 443

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedGalloway v Guardian Royal Exchange (UK) Limited CA 15-Oct-1997
The claimant’s policy had been declared void ab initio by the court. On the application form he had falsely stated that he had no convictions, but had only shortly before been convicted of obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception. Part of the . .
CitedVersloot Dredging Bv and Another v Hdi Gerling Industrie Versicherung Ag and Others SC 20-Jul-2016
The ‘DC MERWESTONE’ suffered a water ingress of water flooding the engine room. This resulted from (i) the negligence of the crew in failing to close the sea inlet valve of the emergency fire pump and drain down the system, after they had used the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 12 December 2022; Ref: scu.214225

Caudle and Others v Sharp; Grove v Sharp: CA 1995

A series of 32 asbestosis reinsurance contracts had been underwritten by Mr Outhwaite him without doing any proper assessment of the risk. The insurance had the wording: ‘each and every loss and/or occurrence . . and/or series of losses and/or occurrences . . arising out of one event’.
Held: The court did not in the context of that policy consider that the ‘one event’ need be an insured peril but did reject the idea that anything that happened could properly be described as ‘an event’. It distinguished between a historical event such as the hundred years war and a single event such as a particular hurricane. Mr Outhwaite’s repeated negligence, his sustained state of ignorance of the truth, could not be described as a single event.

Judges:

Evans LJ

Citations:

[1995] LRLR 433

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromCaudle and Others v Sharp; Grove v Sharp QBD 8-Mar-1994
A continuing failure to investigate the risks of re-insurance was properly to be consideerd one event. . .

Cited by:

Appealed toCaudle and Others v Sharp; Grove v Sharp QBD 8-Mar-1994
A continuing failure to investigate the risks of re-insurance was properly to be consideerd one event. . .
CitedLloyds TSB General Insurance Holdings and others v Lloyds Bank Group Insurance Company Ltd HL 31-Jul-2003
The applicant had paid out many claims for mis-selling pensions. They sought to claim under their insurance. The claims met the requirements of the principle insurance, but the insurance companies sought to impose a limit by aggregation.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 12 December 2022; Ref: scu.185433

Society of Lloyd’s v D Leighs and Others; Society of Lloyd’s v D Wilkinson and Others: ComC 20 Feb 1997

ComC Lloyd’s Litigation – issues relating to recovery from names.
Held: A name at Lloyd’s grants a power of attorney to the underwriting agent to execute that power which is irrevocable.

Judges:

Colman J

Citations:

[1997] CLC 759, [1997] 6 Re LR 214

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromSociety of Lloyd’s v Leighs; Lyon and Wilkinson and Canadian Names Intervenors CA 31-Jul-1997
. .
See AlsoSociety of Lloyd’s v D Leighs and Others; Society of Lloyd’s v D Wilkinson and Others (No. 2) ComC 23-Apr-1997
ComC Lloyd’s Litigation – Misrepresentation, fraudulent – Rescission, restitutio in integrum – Rescission, effect on third parties’ rights – Anti-set-off clauses, counterclaim for fraud – Pay now, sue later . .
CitedBailey and Another v Angove’s Pty Ltd SC 27-Jul-2016
The defendant had agreed to act as the claimant’s agent and distributor of the claimant’s wines in the UK. It acted both as agent and also bought wines on its own account. When the defendant went into litigation the parties disputed the right of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Agency

Updated: 12 December 2022; Ref: scu.186614

Greene Wood Mclean Llp v Templeton Insurance Ltd: ComC 26 Oct 2010

The court considered various cross claims between the firm of solicitors, now in administration,and their insurers after the insurance company had met claims by former clients.

Judges:

Cooke J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 2679 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Liability (Contribution) Act of 1978

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Insurance, Legal Professions, Professional Negligence

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.425562

Societe Anonyme d’Intermediaries Luxembourgeois v Farex Gie: CA 1995

The court considered the duty of disclosure impsed upon an insured: ‘Why should it be a breach of good faith sufficient to deprive the assured of his contract if the agent fails to disclose something which, had the assured known of it, would not have had to have been disclosed by the latter?’

Judges:

Saville LJ

Citations:

[1995] LRLR 116

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHIH Casualty and General Insurance Limited and others v Chase Manhattan Bank and others HL 20-Feb-2003
The insurance company had paid claims on policies used to underwrite the production of TV films. The re-insurers resisted the claims against them by the insurers on the grounds of non-disclosure by the insured, or in the alternative damages for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.219282

Kapur v J W Francis and Co: CA 18 May 1999

Notwithstanding a finding by a High Court Judge that K ‘had shaded the truth’, and ‘lacked frankness in his evidence’, the Court set aside a credibility finding on the basis that not only was there a lack of reasoning as to why the Judge preferred Ks evidence, but that no such finding could appropriately have been made.

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1430

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See alsoKapur v J W Francis and Co and Hinkson CA 9-Feb-1998
When a judge ordered separate trials for liability and as to quantum, it was wrong to order discovery on elements which might not come to trial. . .

Cited by:

CitedPharmacy Care Systems Limited v The Attorney General 16-Aug-2004
(Court of Appeal of New Zealand) The claimant had settled a dispute with a Health Authority which alleged it had overclaimed for pharmacy supplies. It now claimed that the settlement should be set aside as having been entered into under duress. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Professional Negligence

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.146345

The Padre Island: 1984

The 1930 Act creates a statutory assignment of any rights of action in a case where the assured has become bankrupt or been wound up, the party to whom the benefit of a right of action under the liability insurance contract has been transferred may only operate that right in accordance with an arbitration agreement in the contract of insurance even if that agreement is expressed to refer only to the parties to the contract of insurance and not in terms wide enough to cover a statutory assignee.

Citations:

[1984] 2 Lloyds Rep 408

Statutes:

Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Act 1930

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedNisshin Shipping Co Ltd v Cleaves and Company Ltd and others ComC 7-Nov-2003
One party sought a declaration that arbitrators should have no jurisdiction to determine claims for commission said to be due to the Respondent chartering brokers.
Held: Because he has in effect become a statutory assignee of the promisee’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Insolvency, Arbitration

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.187712

The Zephyr: 1984

Whilst it is possible to make a contract which is partly oral and partly written, that is not the practice of the marine insurance market. The policy is the formal contractual document issued to the assured and unequivocally contains the terms of the contract. A contract of marine insurance is inadmissible in evidence unless contained in a policy signed by the insurer.

Judges:

Hobhouse J

Citations:

[1984] 1 Lloyds LR 58, [1985] 2 LLR 529

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedSun Life Assurance Company of Canada (A Company Established Pursuant To the Laws of Canada) v CX Reinsurance Company Limited (Formerly CNA Reinsurance Company Ltd) CA 6-Mar-2003
The claimant appealed a refusal to order that a dispute between insurer and re-insurer be referred to arbitration. One party sought to avoid liability under the policy, alleging misrepresentation. Discussions had been undertaking settling a revised . .
CitedTryg Baltic International (UK) Ltd v Boston Compania De Seguros Sa and others ComC 28-May-2004
Four defendants from Argentina sought to have set aside an order for them to be served, saying the appropriate jursidiction, if there was a triable issue, would be Argentina.
Held: The agreements were to be construed according to English Law. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Contract

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.179738

Axa Insurance Ltd v Akther and Darby Solicitors and Others: CA 12 Nov 2009

The court considered the application of the limitation period to answering when damage occurred when it arises under an unsecured contingent liability. The claimant insurance company had provided after the event litigation insurance policies to the solicitors and their clients, relying on assessments of the cases made by the defendants. The court below had held that the taking out by the defendants of the policies was when the damage occurred.
Held: The claimant insurers’ appeal failed. The case law should not be read to put an unsecured creditor in a better position than a secured one. Analysis of Sephton led to the conclusion that: ‘there had to be measurable loss before time began to be run, that is to say, loss which is additional to the incurring of a purely contingent liability. In my judgment, for this purpose, rights of contribution or subrogation must be ignored because those rights arise by operation of law, unless excluded by agreement or statute. If they were taken into account, they would undermine the basic rule which is clearly established in Sephton that a pure contingent liability is not damage.’
A measurable loss arose on breaches of the vetting duties when the policies were issued, because the mis-assessment devalued the policies.

Judges:

Arden, Longmore, Lloyd LJJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 1166, Times 15-Dec-2009, 127 Con LR 50, [2009] 2 CLC 793, [2010] PNLR 10, [2010] 1 WLR 1662

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromAxa Insurance Ltd v Akther and Darby Solicitors and Others ComC 27-Mar-2009
. .
CitedWardley Australia Ltd v Western Australia 1992
(High Court of Australia) A claim was based on a statutory trade indemnity scheme. The insurers claimed damages from Wardley, on the basis that its alleged deceit induced them to grant an indemnity, which was subsequently called on.
Held: . .
CitedDW Moore and Co Ltd v Ferrier CA 1988
A solicitor was instructed to prepare an agreement providing for the introduction of a new working director into an insurance broking business carried on by a company. His instructions called for the new director to enter into a restrictive covenant . .
CitedShore v Sedgwick Financial Services Ltd CA 23-Jul-2008
The claimant said that the defendant had given him negligent advice on pensions, failing to say that he should stay within his occupational scheme. The defendant pleaded limitation.
Held: The claimant suffered damage when he made the transfer . .
CitedWatkins and Another v Jones Maidment Wilson (A Firm) CA 4-Mar-2008
The claimants alleged professional negligence by the defendant solicitors in advising them to agree to a postponment of a completion. The defendants raised as a preliminary issue the question of limitation. The claimant said that the limitation . .
CitedLaw Society v Sephton and Co (a Firm) and Others HL 10-May-2006
A firm of solicitors had a member involved in a substantial fraud. The defendant firm of accountants certified the firm’s accounts. There were later many calls upon the compensation fund operated by the claimants, who sought recovery in turn from . .
CitedBell v Peter Browne and Co CA 1990
Mr Bell asked his solicitors to transfer the matrimonial home into his wife’s sole name. He was to receive a one-sixth interest of the gross proceeds on a sale. His interests were to be protected by a trust deed or mortgage. The solicitor drafted . .
CitedFirst National Comercial Bank plc v Humberts CA 27-Jan-1995
The plaintiff loaned money on the basis of a negligent survey by the defendant. The borrower subsequently defaulted, and the lender issued a writ. The defendant said that the claim was time barred.
Held: The court allowed the plaintiff’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Insurance, Professional Negligence

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.377883

AC Ward and Son Ltd v Catlin (Five) Ltd and Others: ComC 3 Dec 2009

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 3122 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoAC Ward and Son v Catlin (Five) Ltd and Others CA 10-Sep-2009
The defendant insurers appealed against refusal of summary judgment in its favour in defending a claim under a policy. The claimants premises had been burgled. The insurer said that the claimant had failed to respect warranties given by it as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.381742

Bartoline Limited v Royal Sun Alliance plc: 2007

The claimant sought an indemnity under the Public Liability Section of a Combined Policy for: (i) expense incurred by the Environment Agency under section 161 of the Water Resources Act 1991 cleaning up water courses of pollutants after a fire on the claimant’s premises; and (ii) the cost of works specified in statutory Works Notices served on the claimant by the Agency under section 161A of the 1991 Act. The Public Liability policy provided: ‘The Company will provide indemnity (1) up to the Limit of Indemnity against legal liability for damages in respect of (A) accidental injury of any person (B) accidental loss of or damage to Property (C) nuisance trespass to land or trespass to goods or interference with any easement right of air light water or way other than legal liability for damages which result from a deliberate act or omission of the Insured or which is a natural consequence of the ordinary conduct of the Business and which could reasonably have been expected by the Insured having regard to the nature and circumstances of such act or omission happening during any Period of Insurance in connection with the Business. (2) Against legal liability for claimant’s costs and expenses in connection with 1 above.’ The claim made by the Agency against the claimant was not a claim made in tort.
Held: The Agency’s claim was not covered by the policy.
HHJ Hegarty QC said: ”Damages’ are the pecuniary recompense given by process of law to a person for the actionable wrong that another has done him.
Furthermore, at least in the field of marine insurance, it seems to me to be quite clear that this is the meaning which will normally be attributed to the word. Indeed, in that particular context, an even narrower construction has been adopted, even in the absence of an express term to that effect, since it will normally exclude any damages payable by the insured pursuant to contract.
I can see no obvious reason why a different approach should be adopted in relation to other forms of public liability insurance. The essential purpose of such policies is to provide an indemnity in respect of certain types of tortious liability. That is reflected in the choice of the word ‘damages’ in the insuring clause of the Policy in this case. As it seems to me, that is made even clearer by the particular context in which the word is used, since the indemnity is granted only in respect of ‘legal liability for damages in respect of . . accidental loss of or damage to property . . nuisance trespass to land or trespass to goods or interference with any easement right of air light water or way’.

Judges:

HHJ Hegarty QC

Citations:

[2007] Lloyd’s Rep IR 423

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedTesco Stores Ltd v Constable and others Comc 14-Sep-2007
The defendants provided insurance for the claimant to construct a train tunnel over which the claimant would build a supermarket. The tunnel collapsed, and the railway operator claimed for loss of revenues. The insurers denied responsibility saying . .
CitedBedfordshire Police Authority v Constable and others ComC 20-Jun-2008
The authority insured its primary liability for compensation under the 1886 Act through the claimants and the excess of liability through re-insurers. The parties sought clarification from the court of the respective liabilities of the insurance . .
CitedBedfordshire Police Authority v Constable CA 12-Feb-2009
The police had responded to a riot at Yarlswood detention centre. They had insurance to cover their liability under the 1886 Act, but the re-insurers said that the insurance did not cover the event, saying that the liability was for statutory . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.259383

Hahn v Corbett: 1824

The cargo, Manchester cotton goods, was insured against marine risks from London to Maracaibo ‘warranted free from capture and seizure.’ The vessel was grounded off Maracaibo and became a constructive total loss. Ninety-five per cent of the cargo was damaged and there was no means to carry it on. The day after, the goods were condemned as prize by the occupying Spanish forces and unloaded. The court was asked whether the goods had been lost by the insured peril, perils of the sea or rather by seizure, which was excepted. It was held that the goods were lost when the ship was lost.
Held: The argument that the seizure should be regarded as the proximate cause of the loss was rejected by the court.

Judges:

Best CJ, Park, Burrough JJ

Citations:

[1824] 2 Bing 206

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedKastor Navigation Co Ltd and Another v AGF M A T and others (‘Kastor Too’) ComC 4-Dec-2002
The claimant ship owner and its mortgagee sued the defendant insurer after the loss of the insured vessel, through fire. The insurers replied that the damage by fire was so extensive that the vessel was beyond repair when she sank, and was therefore . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.251809

L Cras v Hughes: 1782

Two Spanish register ships had been captured by a squadron of ships of war assisted by men at arms.

Citations:

(1782) 3 Doug KB 81, 99 ER 549

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedLucena v Craufurd HL 1806
Before the declaration of war, against the United Provinces, His Majesty’s ships took possession of several ships belonging to Dutch East India men, and took them to St Helena. The Commissioners then insured the ships for their journey from St . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.238205

Regina v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ex parte Lunn Poly Limited and Bishopsgate Insurance Limited: CA 26 Feb 1999

A tax on holiday insurance premiums which differentiated between policies sold by independent insurance brokers and those sold by travel agents was unlawful in European law, constituting state aid without the appropriate notice having been given.

Citations:

Times 11-Mar-1999, Gazette 31-Mar-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 867

Statutes:

EC Treaty Art 92

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

European, Insurance, Customs and Excise, Taxes – Other

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.145782

Bee v Jenson: ComC 21 Dec 2006

The defendant objected to paying the plaintiff the costs of a replacement hire car after the accident for which he was liable. He said that the plaintiff was in any event insured to recover that cost, and the insurance company were subrogated to the plaintiff’s claim. He also said that the insurer should give credit for any commission received by the insurer from the hire company.
Held: The defendant was liable. The arrangements between the claimant and his insurers were not the concern of the defendant. It was necessary to distinguish subrogation to remedy an unjust enrichment, and contractual subrogation which was concerned only with the mutual rights and obligations under the insurance contract and did not affect strangers to the contract. The insurance benefit is not the provision of a car but rather the payment of hire charges. The fact that Mr Bee was the Hirer under the agreement and that there was an express right of subrogation in order to recover Vehicle Hire Costs indicate that DAS were not the providers of the car; they merely reserved the right to nominate the hire company which would be unnecessary were DAS providing the car themselves. Even if it was contemplated that Mr Bee would never pay the hire charge himself, nonetheless he was in receipt of an insurance benefit, namely an indemnity against the cost of hire.

Judges:

Monson J

Citations:

Times 16-Jan-2007, [2006] EWHC 3359 (Comm), [2007] Lloyd’s Rep IR Plus 32

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedCastellain v Preston CA 12-Mar-1883
The court emphasised the amplitude of the insurer’s right of subrogation which gave him ‘the advantage of every right of the assured, whether such right consists in contract, fulfilled or unfulfilled, or in remedy for tort capable of being insisted . .
CitedAdams v London Improved Motor Coach Builders Ltd CA 1921
The plaintiff successfully sued his employers for wrongful dismissal. The defendant argued it should not pay costs since it was the plaintiff’s union who had retained the solicitors in the case, and it was the union to which the solicitors looked . .
CitedYorkshire Insurance Co Ltd v Nisbet Shipping Co Ltd QBD 1961
The assured alone can give a valid receipt and discharge to a third party against whom a judgment has been given following a successful subrogated claim.
Diplock J said: ‘The expression ‘subrogation’ in relation to a contract of marine . .
CitedLagden v O’Connor HL 4-Dec-2003
The parties had been involved in a road traffic accident. The defendant drove into the claimant’s parked car. The claimant was unable to afford to hire a car pending repairs being completed, and arranged to hire a car on credit. He now sought . .
CitedBurdis v Livsey QBD 2001
The several cases claimed the cost of provision by credit hire companies of car hire and repair services to the innocent victims of road accidents. The transactions were ‘res inter alios acta’ – collateral to the commission of the tort. . .
CitedDimond v Lovell HL 12-May-2000
A claimant sought as part of her damages for the cost of hiring a care whilst her own was off the road after an accident caused by the defendant. She agreed with a hire company to hire a car, but payment was delayed until the claim was settled.
CitedDavies v Taylor (No 2) HL 2-Jan-1974
The plaintiff argued that no costs had been incurred by the successful defendant, as he was insured, and the insurance company was bound to pay his costs.
Held: ‘In this case the solicitors, no doubt first instructed by the insurance company, . .
CitedBanque Financiere De La Cite v Parc (Battersea) Ltd and Others HL 16-Apr-1998
The making of an order for restitution after finding an unjust enrichment by subrogation, is not dependant upon having found any common or unilateral intention of the parties. The House distinguished between contractual subrogation of the kind most . .
CitedHobbs v Marlowe HL 1978
The doctrine of subrogation in contracts of insurance operated entirely by virtue of an implied term of the contract of insurance: ‘I take it to be clear beyond all argument that an assured under a policy insuring him against loss of or damage to a . .
CitedCaledonian North Sea Ltd v London Bridge Engineering Ltd and Others IHCS 2000
Lord Rodger: ‘Subrogation works by giving the insurer who indemnifies the assured the right to raise proceedings in his name and, by the very nature of the circumstances in which it comes into play, the proceedings by the insurer must necessarily be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.247978

Caledonian North Sea Ltd v London Bridge Engineering Ltd and Others: HL 7 Feb 2002

Substantial personal injury claims had been settled following the Piper Alpha disaster. Where a contractual indemnity had been provided under a contract, and insurance had also been taken out, but the insurance had not been a contractual requirement, those giving the contractual indemnity must bear the primary liability. The insurer could claim subrogation to the indemnity claim in respect of the same loss.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hoffmann and Lord Scott of Foscote

Citations:

Times 13-Feb-2002, [2002] UKHL 4, [2002] 1 LLR 553, [2002] Lloyds Rep IR 261, [2002] 1 All ER (Comm) 321, 2002 SLT 278, [2002] CLC 741, 2002 SC (HL) 117, [2002] BLR 139, 2002 SCLR 346, 2002 GWD 6-178

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

CitedRandal v Cockran 17-Jun-1948
An insurer who has fully indemnified an insured against a loss covered by a contract of insurance between them may ordinarily enforce, in the insurer’s own name, any right of recourse available to the insured. . .
CitedMason v Sainsbury 19-Apr-1782
A claim was made upon insurance after a riot. The court asked asked ‘Who is first liable?’ This was not an issue of chronology but of establishing where the primary responsibility lay to make good the loss. The Act laid the primary responsibility . .
CitedLondon Assurance Company v SainsburyWood Immigration 28-Jun-1783
An insurance office having paid the assured the amount of the loss sustained by him in consequence of a demolishing by rioters, sued the hundredors under the stat. I G. 1, at. 2, e. 5, s. 6, in their own names. HeId by Lord Mansfield and Butler, J. . .
CitedYates v Whyte 1838
Plaintiff sued Defendants for damaging his ship by collision : Held, that Defendants were not entitled to deduct from the amount of damages to be paid by them, a sum of money paid to Plaintiff by insurers in respect of such damage. . .
CitedDickenson v Jardine CCP 1868
Goods had been insured for the voyage, but were jettisoned on it. The ship completed her voyage, and the owners of the goods became entitled to recover general average contribution from the other interests which had profited from the jettison. . .
CitedNorth British and Mercantile Insurance Company v London Liverpool and Globe Insurance Company 1877
In a dispute between insurers as to who should bear the loss, it was held that the loss should be borne by the wharfinger’s insurer because ‘the primary liability’ was that of the wharfinger. The customary strict responsibility of a wharfinger for . .
CitedCastellain v Preston CA 12-Mar-1883
The court emphasised the amplitude of the insurer’s right of subrogation which gave him ‘the advantage of every right of the assured, whether such right consists in contract, fulfilled or unfulfilled, or in remedy for tort capable of being insisted . .
CitedLord Napier and Ettrick and Another v Hunter and Others; Same v R F Kershaw Ltd HL 3-Mar-1993
Certain insureds sought recovery of a sum which was greater than the sum which had been paid to them by their insurers. The insureds had claimed first on the policies of insurance. Their claims had been met. The insureds then pursued an action in . .
CitedHadley v Baxendale Exc 23-Feb-1854
Contract Damages; What follows the Breach Naturaly
The plaintiffs had sent a part of their milling machinery for repair. The defendants contracted to carry it, but delayed in breach of contract. The plaintiffs claimed damages for the earnings lost through the delay. The defendants appealed, saying . .
CitedThe Iron and Steel Fencing and Buildings Co 1891
The particular use of the goods in question on which the pursuers’ claim for loss was based was a use which was not within the contemplation of the parties to the contract at the time it was made, and therefore the proper level of damages was that . .
CitedSickness and Accident Assurance Association v General Accident Assurance Corporation Limited OHCS 1892
An insurance company, after paying to a tramway company a sum due under a policy insuring against loss by accident, raised an action in its own name against another insurance company for contribution on the ground that it had insured the same risk. . .
CitedLarrinaga Steamship Co Ltd v The King HL 1944
The vessel, discharging at St. Nazaire, was ordered by charterers to return to Cardiff. Despite severely deteriorating weather conditions a Sea Transport Officer instructed the vessel to sail on completion of discharge to Quiberon Bay to join a . .
CitedScholefield Goodman and Sons Ltd v Zyngier PC 16-Aug-1985
(Victoria) By a mortgage executed in favour of the bank Mrs Zyngier covenanted to pay to the bank any sums which might be owed to it either by herself or by a named company, including any amounts for or in respect of any bills of exchange on which . .
CitedEsso Petroleum Co Ltd v Hall Russell and Co Ltd (The Esso Bernicia) HL 1989
Lord Goff of Chieveley said: ‘In normal cases, as for example under contracts of insurance, the insurer will on payment request the assured to sign a letter of subrogation, authorising the insurer to proceed in the name of the assured against any . .
CitedHotel Services Ltd v Hilton International Hotels (Uk) Ltd CA 15-Mar-2000
. .
Appeal fromCaledonian North Sea Ltd v London Bridge Engineering Ltd and Others IHCS 2000
Lord Rodger: ‘Subrogation works by giving the insurer who indemnifies the assured the right to raise proceedings in his name and, by the very nature of the circumstances in which it comes into play, the proceedings by the insurer must necessarily be . .

Cited by:

CitedCo-Operative Retail Services Limited and others v Taylor Young Partnership and others HL 25-Apr-2002
Whilst a substantial new building was being constructed, it was damaged by fire caused by the negligence of several contractors. The case concerned apportionment of liability.
Held: The appeal failed. The parties could by agreement vary the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Damages

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.167608

G and GB Hewitt Ltd v SA Namur-Assurances Du Credit: CA 8 Mar 1999

An exclusion clause in a contract insuring against bad debts, avoiding liability where import or export orders were banned, did not apply to supplies to a company who later intended to export the goods but became insolvent following ban on exports.

Citations:

Gazette 10-Mar-1999, Times 08-Mar-1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Insurance, Contract

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.80718

Simmonds v Cockell: 1920

The insurance policy warranted that the premises would be always occupied. The premises were damaged while the insured and his wife were absent for a few hours.
Held: The warranty did not require a permanent continuous presence, and the insurer did not avoid liability. If the insurers had wanted a ‘continuous presence of some one in the premises’, they could have stipulated that ‘the premises were never to be left unattended’.

Judges:

Roche J

Citations:

[1920] 1 KB 843

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedGE Frankona Reinsurance Ltd v CMM Trust No.1400 (the ‘Newfoundland Explorer’) AdCt 22-Mar-2006
The owner sought to claim under his insurance policy. The yacht was, in the policy warranted to be fully crewed at all times. The owner had left the boat to return a few hours later when it was found on fire.
Held: The insurance claim failed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 01 December 2022; Ref: scu.242639

Dornoch Ltd and others v Mauritius Union Assurance Company Ltd and Another: CA 10 Apr 2006

reinsurance jurisdiction dispute.

Judges:

Lord Justice May Lord Justice Tuckey Lord Justice Potter

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 389, [2006] 1 CLC 714, [2006] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 475, [2006] 2 All ER (Comm) 385, [2006] Lloyd’s Rep IR 786

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromDornoch Ltd and others v The Mauritius Union Assurance Company Ltd and Another ComC 19-Aug-2005
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Jurisdiction

Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.240171

Jacobs v Coster, Avon Insurance: CA 25 Jan 1999

Citations:

[1998] CLY 3374, [1999] EWCA Civ 647, [2000] Lloyd’s Rep IR 506

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedMacCaferri Ltd v Zurich Insurance Plc ComC 19-Jun-2015
maccafferiCoC201506
The claimant manufacturer challenged a refusal of indemnity from his insurers, the defendants under its product liability policy. An end user consumer had been injured. The insurer said that the claimant had delayed on notifying the possible claim. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Insurance

Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.145562

Printpak v AGF Insurance Limited: CA 29 Jan 1999

A commercial fire policy which broke its warranties and provisions into sections did not evade cover when a breach of one section did not withdraw cover because that section excluded the provisions of the Act.

Citations:

Times 03-Feb-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 683

Statutes:

Marine Insurance Act 1906 33(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Insurance

Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.145598

In Re Continental Assurance Company of London Plc (In Liquidation) (2): ChD 14 Jan 1999

The rules are intended to provide a comprehensive and unitary scheme of management of company liquidations, and in voluntary liquidation, the date of the resolution commencing the dissolution is to be used as the date of the winding up order.

Citations:

Gazette 10-Feb-1999, Times 14-Jan-1999

Statutes:

Insurance Companies (Winding Up) Rules 1985 95 L2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Insurance, Insolvency, Company

Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.81817

Passmore v Vulcan Boiler and General Insurance Co Ltd: 1936

Citations:

(1936) 54 Ll L Rep 92

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedAXA Insurance UK Ltd v EUI Ltd (T/A Elephant Insurance) QBD 14-May-2020
The claimant insurer had insured a garage in respect of a car it used for loan to customers when their own car was being repaired. There was a collision on the customer driving home from work. The defendant insurer was the driver’s own insurer. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.650941

Castellain v Preston: 1883

The court emphasised the amplitude of the insurer’s right of subrogation which gave him ‘the advantage of every right of the assured, whether such right consists in contract, fulfilled or unfulfilled, or in remedy for tort capable of being insisted on or already insisted on, or in any other right, whether by way of condition or otherwise, legal or equitable . . The second right vested in the insurer by the doctrine of subrogation is to claim from the assured any benefit conferred on the assured by third parties with the aim of compensating the assured for the loss in respect of which the insurer has indemnified him. The right is usually exercised by an insurer claiming from the assured a sum equivalent to any sum of damages paid to the assured by a third party legally liable for the loss. The right is wider in scope than that, however, and the insurer is entitled to moneys paid to the assured ex gratia to diminish his loss unless intended by the donor to benefit the assured to the exclusion of the insurers.’ The doctrine of subrogation is based on the fact that a contract of insurance is a contract of indemnity, and that the insurer is placed in the shoes of the insured in respect of claims whereby the insured loss is diminished

Judges:

Brett LJ

Citations:

(1883) 11 QBD 380

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedCaledonian North Sea Ltd v London Bridge Engineering Ltd and Others HL 7-Feb-2002
Substantial personal injury claims had been settled following the Piper Alpha disaster. Where a contractual indemnity had been provided under a contract, and insurance had also been taken out, but the insurance had not been a contractual . .
CitedBee v Jenson ComC 21-Dec-2006
The defendant objected to paying the plaintiff the costs of a replacement hire car after the accident for which he was liable. He said that the plaintiff was in any event insured to recover that cost, and the insurance company were subrogated to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.191161

AXA Insurance UK Ltd v EUI Ltd (T/A Elephant Insurance): QBD 14 May 2020

The claimant insurer had insured a garage in respect of a car it used for loan to customers when their own car was being repaired. There was a collision on the customer driving home from work. The defendant insurer was the driver’s own insurer. The parties disputed responsibility allocation as between them and the nature of the use – whether as a ‘private motor car’ or for ‘social, domestic and pleasure use’.
Held:

Judges:

Foster J

Citations:

[2020] EWHC 1207 (QB), [2020] WLR(D) 286

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedPassmore v Vulcan Boiler and General Insurance Co Ltd 1936
. .
CitedSeddon v Binions CA 1978
The Court gave guidance on the proper method of interpreting a term of a motor insurance policy which defines the limitations of use subject to which the policy provides cover. Roskill LJ: ‘Inevitably, where one has a phrase such as ‘social, . .
CitedAXN and Others v Worboys and Others QBD 25-Jun-2012
W had used his taxi driving as an oportunity to drug and then rape passengers. He had been prosecuted for several offences, and the court now considered whether additional civil actions could proceed, claiming under his road traffic insurance. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Road Traffic

Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.650820

AXN and Others v Worboys and Others: QBD 25 Jun 2012

W had used his taxi driving as an oportunity to drug and then rape passengers. He had been prosecuted for several offences, and the court now considered whether additional civil actions could proceed, claiming under his road traffic insurance.

Judges:

Silber J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 1730 (QB), [2013] Lloyd’s Rep IR 207

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedAXA Insurance UK Ltd v EUI Ltd (T/A Elephant Insurance) QBD 14-May-2020
The claimant insurer had insured a garage in respect of a car it used for loan to customers when their own car was being repaired. There was a collision on the customer driving home from work. The defendant insurer was the driver’s own insurer. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Insurance

Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.460858

Seddon v Binions: CA 1978

The Court gave guidance on the proper method of interpreting a term of a motor insurance policy which defines the limitations of use subject to which the policy provides cover. Roskill LJ: ‘Inevitably, where one has a phrase such as ‘social, domestic or pleasure purposes’ used in a policy of insurance . . there will be cases which will fall on one side of the line and cases which will fall on the other side. For my part, however much claims managers might wish it otherwise, I do not believe it is possible to state any firm principle under which it can always be predicted which side of the line a particular case will fall. It must depend on the facts of the particular case; and the facts of particular cases will vary infinitely in their detail.’ and ‘It seems to me that the solution to the problem can best be reached in this case by asking the question: what was the essential character of the journey in the course of which the particular accident occurred?’ and ‘It may well be that there will be cases, as there have been in the past, where the essential character . . of a particular journey was of a particular kind – and that that essential character will not be altered in the crucial respects merely because, incidental to that journey, something happens in the way of giving a lift to a friend as an act of courtesy or, to borrow Mr Justice du Parcq’s expression [in Passmore v Vulcan Boiler and General Insurance Co Ltd (1936) 54 Ll L R 92], charity.’ Megaw LJ: ‘[I]n general, I should have thought that there is something that can clearly be called, as I would put it, a primary purpose, by which I intend the same meaning, I think, as Roskill LJ intended in using the phrase ‘essential character of the journey’. If there be such a primary purpose, or essential character, then the Courts should not be meticulous to seek to find some possible secondary purpose, or some inessential character, the result of which could be suggested to be that the use of the car fell outside the proper use for the purposes of which cover was given by the insurance policy.’

Judges:

Roskill LJ, Megaw LJ

Citations:

[1978] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 381, [1978] RTR 163

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedKeeley (Widow of Terence Noel James Keeley Deceased) v Pashen and Wren Motor Syndicate 1202 at Lloyd’s CA 10-Nov-2004
The driver had driven his car at a crowd of people intending to frighten them. Instead one had been killed. The insurers resisted liability saying that the use of the car for this purpose and as it was being used as a taxi, was not use for social . .
AppliedCaple v Sewell and others CA 9-Nov-2001
. .
CitedAXA Insurance UK Ltd v EUI Ltd (T/A Elephant Insurance) QBD 14-May-2020
The claimant insurer had insured a garage in respect of a car it used for loan to customers when their own car was being repaired. There was a collision on the customer driving home from work. The defendant insurer was the driver’s own insurer. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Insurance

Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.220134

Reed v Royal Exchange Assurance Co: 1795

A wife is presumed to have an insurable interest in the life of her husband.

Citations:

(1795) Peake (Add Cas) 70, (1795) 170 ER 198

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedMurphy (By Her Litigation Friend Stockmont) v Holland CA 19-Dec-2003
A married couple had taken out an insurance policy on their joint lives. The policy was maintained after they divorced. On his death, his child by the later marriage claimed a share in the policy under the 1975 Act.
Held: (Chadwick LJ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.195616

Gray v Barr: ChD 1970

The defendant had used a shotgun to threaten a man and the gun had accidentally gone off and killed him. The issue was whether the defendant could recover in respect of his liability under a policy of insurance. .
Held: The rule of public policy that a criminal should forfeit any interest in a benefit arising from his act only applies where the offender is guilty of violence: ‘However to confine the operation of public policy to cases where there was an actual intent to kill would be to exclude many cases of actual murder: that is to say those cases where the killing was done with intent to do grievous bodily harm, but not to kill. It would further include some cases of manslaughter, for example, manslaughter where the killing was done intentionally but under the stress of provocation, or killing in pursuance of a suicide pact. The logical test, in my judgment, is whether the person seeking the indemnity was guilty of deliberate, intentional and unlawful violence or threats of violence. If he was, and death resulted therefrom, then, however unintended the final death of the victim may have been, the court should not entertain a claim for indemnity.’

Judges:

Geoffrey Lane J

Citations:

[1970] 2 QB 626

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromGray v Barr CA 1971
A husband had accidentally shot and killed his wife’s lover after threatening him with a shotgun.
Held: The court confirmed the decision at first instance. He was not liable to be indemnified by his insurers for the losses claimed against him . .
CitedDunbar (As Administrator of Tony Dunbar Deceased) v Plant CA 23-Jul-1997
The couple had decided on a suicide pact. They made repeated attempts, resulting in his death. Property had been held in joint names. The deceased’s father asked the court to apply the 1982 Act to disentitle Miss Plant.
Held: The appeal was . .
CitedRe H deceased CA 1991
The Plaintiff had stabbed his wife to death when under the illusion, induced by a reaction to an anti-depressant drug, that she had just committed an act of infidelity. At his trial, a plea to guilty of manslaughter by reason of diminished . .
CitedD v L and Others ChD 16-Apr-2003
The claimant had been found guilty of the manslaughter by diminished responsibility of the deceased. He now sought disapplication of the 1982 Act.
Held: The application failed: ‘The reforms introduced by the Homicide Act 1957 were designed to . .
CitedChallen v Challen and Another ChD 27-May-2020
Forfeiture rule disapplied after spousal abuse
The claimant sought the disapplication of the forfeiture rule. She had been convicted of the manslaughter of her seriously abusive husband. The court considered whether a conviction for murder set aside and replaced with one of manslaughter was a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Wills and Probate, Crime

Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.185186

Cape Plc v The Iron Trades Employers Insurance Assc Ltd: 21 Apr 1999

ComC An exclusion in an employers’ liability policy of ‘pneumoconiosis’ (fibrosis of the lungs caused by the inhalation of dust) does not embrace mesothelioma (cancer of the pleura or peritoneum caused by the inhalation of asbestos dust) – Asbestosis (pneumoconiosis caused by inhalation of asbestos dust) was therefore within the exclusion, but mesothelioma was not. There was no case for rectification of the policy to extend the exclusion to all asbestos related diseases, and even if there had been, the remedy of rectification would fail for laches in circumstances where the issue had been seen by the insurer in 1969 but not raised with the insured until points of defence in the 1995 proceedings. The insurer’s case of estoppel by convention or acquiescence failed. The insurer’s case of non-disclosure of mesothelioma claims failed, since there were only two relevant such claims, the insurer knew in general that its insured would be receiving such claims, it was not clear that the cause of death was ascribed to mesothelioma as distinct from mesothelioma due to asbestosis, the normal arrangement between the parties was for the insured to provide claims records in only general terms without differentiations as to disease, and in any event no inducement was proved.

Judges:

Rix J

Citations:

[1999] PIQR Q212

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Insurance, Personal Injury

Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.225404

Society of Lloyd’s v Jaffray and others: CA 8 Oct 2001

Applications in group litigation between the Society of Lloyd’s and Names at Lloyd’s – ‘ threshold fraud point’

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1503, [2001] EWCA Civ 1485

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromSociety of Lloyd’s v Jaffray and others QBD 3-Aug-2000
Any party was free to put in evidence statements where the party who had prepared them had himself decided not to call the evidence. There was no power to call the person to give that evidence, but it could be admitted on the basis that it was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.201444

Brotherton and Another v Aseguradora Colseguros S A and Another: CA 22 May 2003

Allegations against the insured were extant at the date of the proposal. The insurers sought to avoid the claim.

Judges:

Lord Justice Buxton, Lord Justice Mance, Lord Justice Ward

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 705, [2003] 2 All ER (Comm) 298, [2003] Lloyd’s Rep IR 746

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedNorwich Union Insurance Ltd v Meisels and Another QBD 9-Nov-2006
The claimants sought payment for water damage under their policies. The insurer alleged non-disclosure. The judge had found the claimants to be honest, and criticised the defendants witnesses. The claimants had been involved in companies which had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.183717

Mighell v Reading and Another and Evans v Motor Insurers Bureau and White v White and Another: CA 30 Sep 1998

Passengers were injured in motor vehicles. The drivers were uninsured, and the MIB had declined to make payment. The doctrine of direct effect did not apply where the allegation was that the Motor Insurers Bureau arrangement did not comply with a European Directive. It was not clear whether the Bureau was an emanation of state, but government had had a choice of institutions through which to implement the Directive. As to the nature of the MIB: ‘Its members are private law insurance companies who have chosen for the time being to write motor insurance business. It is true that they have a statutory position in that it is compulsory for the user of a motor vehicle on the road to take out a policy with a company which is a member of the Bureau. (Section 145 of the Road Traffic Act, 1988). But the Motor Insurers’ Bureau scheme has been in existence from a time earlier than the United Kingdom’s membership of the European Communities (or Union) and agreements between the Bureau and the Secretary of State relating to uninsured drivers and untraced drivers have long formed part of that scheme.’

Judges:

Hobhouse LJ

Citations:

Times 12-Oct-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 1465, [1999] 1 LLR 30

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromEvans v Motor Insurance Bureau ComC 29-Jul-1997
ComC Untraced Drivers Scheme of the Motor Insurers Bureau – obligation to award interest – power to award interest under section 19A of the 1950 Act. . .
See AlsoEvans v Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions Motor Insurers’ Bureau CA 18-Jan-2001
. .

Cited by:

Appealed toEvans v Motor Insurance Bureau ComC 29-Jul-1997
ComC Untraced Drivers Scheme of the Motor Insurers Bureau – obligation to award interest – power to award interest under section 19A of the 1950 Act. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Personal Injury, Road Traffic, Insurance

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.144944

Waters v The Monarch Fire and Life Assurance Co: 1856

The plaintiff must show an insurable interest in goods to make a claim. This will usually means that he is at least either a part-owner or bailee.

Citations:

(1856) 5 El and Bl 870

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedAlfred Mcalpine Construction Limited v Panatown Limited HL 17-Feb-2000
A main contractor who was building not on his own land, would only be free to claim damages from a sub-contractor for defects in the building where the actual owner of the land would not also have had a remedy. Here, the land owner was able to sue . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.218912

In re Eddystone Marine Insurance Co, ex parte Western Insurance: 1892

Citations:

[1892] Ch 423

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

ConsideredCharter Reinsurance Co Ltd v Fagan and Others HL 24-May-1996
The re-insurers appealed against a finding that they were liable to make payment under a contract which required them to pay ‘sums actually paid.’ They said that the company having become insolvent, no payment would in fact be made.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.198316

Le Cheminant v Pearson: 1812

The insured having carried out a partial repair folowing one incident, the vessel was then a total loss.
Held: The insured could recover both losses.

Citations:

(1812) 4 Taunt 367

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedKastor Navigation Co Ltd and Another v AGF M A T and others (‘Kastor Too’) ComC 4-Dec-2002
The claimant ship owner and its mortgagee sued the defendant insurer after the loss of the insured vessel, through fire. The insurers replied that the damage by fire was so extensive that the vessel was beyond repair when she sank, and was therefore . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.196004

Lea v Hinton: 1854

One person may have an insurable interest not only in his own life, but also in the life of another.

Citations:

(1854) 5 De Gex, MacNaghten and Gordon 823, (1854) 43 ER 1090

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedMurphy (By Her Litigation Friend Stockmont) v Holland CA 19-Dec-2003
A married couple had taken out an insurance policy on their joint lives. The policy was maintained after they divorced. On his death, his child by the later marriage claimed a share in the policy under the 1975 Act.
Held: (Chadwick LJ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.195614

Barrett (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Royal London Mutual Insurance Society Ltd: CA 12 Jun 2003

The question arising was whether paragraph 55(2) of Schedule 8 to the Finance Act 1995, a reinsurance treaty entered into on 25 November 1994 by the taxpayer reinsurer with a non-resident cedant is, by virtue of the fact that policies of life assurance ceded by that treaty were issued before 1 November 1994, within the following opening words of such paragraph ‘Where the policy or contract for any life assurance business was made before 1 November 1994 . . ‘
Held: Contracts for re-insurance were to be treated as coming within the definition of contracts for insurance, and so were caught by the transitional provisions. This construction leads to a matching between the business referred to in the opening clause of paragraph 55(2) and that referred to in the operative part of that provision. Appeal allowed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Mummery, Lady Justice Arden And Mr Justice Nelson

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 789, Times 18-Jun-2003, [2003] BTC 368, [2003] STC 1129, 75 TC 261, [2003] STI 1071

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Finance Act 1995 Sch8 Par55

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromBarrett (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Royal London Mutual Insurance Society Ltd ChD 5-Jul-2002
Paragraph 57(2) of Schedule 8 to the Finance Act 1995, which provides that section 442A of the Taxes Act 1998 ‘does not apply in relation to the reinsurance of a policy or contract where the policy or contract was made, and the reinsurance . .

Cited by:

Appealed toBarrett (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Royal London Mutual Insurance Society Ltd ChD 5-Jul-2002
Paragraph 57(2) of Schedule 8 to the Finance Act 1995, which provides that section 442A of the Taxes Act 1998 ‘does not apply in relation to the reinsurance of a policy or contract where the policy or contract was made, and the reinsurance . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Corporation Tax

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.183641

Arab Bank Plc v John D Wood Commercial Ltd (In Liquidation) and others: CA 25 Nov 1999

Having once recovered damages against a valuer for a negligent survey, there was nothing to stop a lender recovering also under a policy of insurance under a mortgage indemnity guarantee, and so the lender was not required to give credit for monies already received. Such policies were taken out for the benefit of the lender not the borrower, and the insurance company being subrogated to the lender, no double recovery was involved.

Judges:

Mance LJ

Citations:

Times 25-Nov-1999, Gazette 08-Dec-1999, [2000] 1 WLR 857

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedGoldstein v Levy Gee ( A Firm) ChD 1-Jul-2003
There had been a dispute between shareholders, and the defendant was called upon to value the company. He issued a tender for valuers to value the properties. Complaint was made that the tender was negligent in its description of the basis for . .
CitedRoger Michael and others v Douglas Henry Miller and Another ChD 22-Mar-2004
Property had been sold by the respondents as mortgagees in possession. The claimants said the judge had failed to award the value of the property as found to be valued, and had not given a proper value to a crop of lavender.
Held: In . .
CitedLowick Rose Llp v Swynson Ltd and Another SC 11-Apr-2017
Losses arose from the misvaluation of a company before its purchase. The respondent had funded the purchase, relying upon a valuation by the predecessor of the appellant firm of accountants. Further advances had been made when the true situation was . .
CitedSS (Sri Lanka), Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 15-Jun-2018
The court was asked whether, in cases heard by the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) where the credibility of the appellant is in issue, there is a rule that a delay of more than three months between the hearing of oral evidence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Insurance, Banking, Equity

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.77841

Single Buoy Moorings Inc v Aspen Insurance UK Ltd: ComC 13 Jul 2018

Teare J considered the without prejudice rule: ‘In my judgment an exception can only be allowed where it is of the same character as one already established or where it is an incremental but principled extension of an existing exception, as was the exception in Oceanbulk v TMT.’

Judges:

Teare J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 1763 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBriggs and Others v Clay and Others ChD 25-Feb-2019
Defendants’ application to exclude evidence said to be ‘without prejudice’ The case concerned a pension scheme for employees within a group of companies. In a prior action by way of a Part 8 claim brought by the trustees of the scheme, the court had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Litigation Practice

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.619842

Smyth v St Andrew’s Insurance Plc: QBD 17 Sep 2012

Damages claim by a home owner against his insurers for (in effect) indemnity in respect of fire damage. The defendant insurers deny liability on the grounds that the fire, they allege, was deliberately started by a member of the home owner’s family (his partner), and that the resultant damage therefore falls within an exception to the cover under the policy. The Claimant disputes this on the facts, and suggests, subject always to the burden of proof resting on the insurers, that the more likely cause of this fire was accident.

Judges:

John Randall QC, Deputy Judge

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 2511 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Insurance

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.464395

KR and others v Bryn Alyn Community (Holdings) Ltd and Another: CA 10 Jun 2003

The court considered an extension of the time for claiming damages for personal injuries after the claimants said they had been sexually abused as children in the care of the defendants.
Held: The test to be applied under section 14(2) was ‘partly subjective’and ‘section 14(2) was designed principally to provide for cases of late diagnosis of physical diseases, such asbestosis or byssinosis, the deadly development of which may be unknown until their symptoms eventually appear.’ The section ‘does not fit so readily the circumstances of abused children who, because of their immaturity and vulnerable position might never consider and seek advice about suing their abusers’. In such a case, the trial judge, when considering the applicability of section 14(2), must take into account the claimant’s ‘individual history and circumstances, the nature severity and duration of the abuse, the period of time when it occurred and its physical and/or mental effects evident to the claimant’. The judge would then have ‘to relate them all to the question whether the claimant, given those and any other relevant circumstances, would have considered the injury . . sufficiently serious to institute proceedings against a solvent compliant defendant’.

Judges:

Auld LJ

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 783, [2003] QB 1441, [2003] CPLR 415

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Act 1930 1, Limitation Act 1980

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoRowlands and others v Bryn Alyn Community (Holdings) Ltd and Royal and Sun Alliance Plc CA 24-Mar-2003
. .
See AlsoDK, KR, CGE, DHM, PS, RM, DJ, GOM v Bryn Alyn Community (Holdings) Ltd (In Liquidation) and Royal and Sun Alliance PLC CA 22-May-2003
. .
CitedMcCafferty v Metropolitan Police Receiver CA 1977
The test of whether a plaintiff had sufficient knowledge to justify the start of time running against her takes into account her subjective characteristics but then applies an outsider’s view of what she should have thought.
Geoffrey Lane LJ . .
CitedDobbie v Medway Health Authority CA 11-May-1994
The plaintiff had a lump on her breast. The surgeon, without first subjecting the lump to a microscopic examination in order to determine whether it was cancerous or benign, removed the breast. This was in 1973. The lump was subsequently found to be . .

Cited by:

CitedKR and others v Royal and Sun Alliance Plc CA 3-Nov-2006
The insurer appealed findings of liability under the 1930 Act. Claims had been made for damages for child abuse in a residential home, whom they insured. The home had become insolvent, and the claimants had pursued the insurer.
Held: The . .
CitedMcCoubrey v Ministry of Defence CA 24-Jan-2007
The defendant appealed a decision allowing a claim to proceed more than ten years after it had been suffered. The claimant’s hearing had been damaged after an officer threw a thunderflash into his trench on an exercise.
Held: The defendant’s . .
CriticisedA v Hoare HL 30-Jan-2008
Each of six claimants sought to pursue claims for damages for sexual assaults which would otherwise be time barred under the 1980 Act after six years. They sought to have the House depart from Stubbings and allow a discretion to the court to extend . .
DisapprovedBowden v Poor Sisters of Nazareth and others and similar HL 21-May-2008
The appellants said they had suffered abuse while resident at children’s homes run by the respondents. The respondents denied the allegations and said that they were also out of time. The claims were brought many years after the events.
Held: . .
CitedMcDonnell and Another v Walker CA 24-Nov-2009
The defendant appealed against the disapplication of section 11 of the 1980 Act under section 33.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The defendant had not contributed significantly to the delay: ‘the defendant received claims quite different in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Insurance

Updated: 20 November 2022; Ref: scu.184075

Sirius International Insurance Company v FAI General Insurance Ltd and others: CA 4 Apr 2003

An insurance and banking dispute with regard to the benefit of a letter of credit had been settled between the companies, but the parties then disagreed as to the meaning of the settlement.
Held: Counsel for Sirius ‘accepted that the second condition of the 3 September 1999 agreement was not and is not fulfilled. He accepted that the first condition was not fulfilled before the Tomlin order. He accepted that the literal words of paragraph 1 do not express an agreement by FAI that Sirius should pay Agnew’s claim. Creative construction or implication is required to interpret it as doing so. He accepted, I think, that an award in contested arbitration proceedings would not have fulfilled the first condition. But the Tomlin order, he said, embodied an agreement not an award, and the agreement that Sirius should be entitled to prove in FAI’s liquidation or administration for US$22.5m necessarily carried with it an agreement by FAI that Sirius should pay Agnew’s claim. I do not think so.’ FAI were entitled to the proceeds of the letter of credit in the escrow account. The effect was Sirius became an unsecured creditor in the insolvency of FAI

Judges:

May LJ Carnwath LJ

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 470, [2003] 1 WLR 2214

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromSirius International Insurance Co (Publ) v FAI General Insurance Ltd ChD 23-Jul-2002
The beneficiary sought to claim under a letter of credit. The bank resisted saying that the conditions in a letter accompanying the letter of credit had not been satisfied.
Held: The conditions set out in the letter of credit were satisfied . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromSirius International Insurance Company (Publ) v FAI General Insurance Limited and others HL 2-Dec-2004
The appellant had taken certain insurance risks on behalf of the respondents, subject to banking indemnities. Disputes arose and were settled under a Tomlin order, which was now itself subject to challenge.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 20 November 2022; Ref: scu.180746

Maritsave Ltd v National Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Society Ltd: QBD 1 Jul 2011

The claimant sought a declaration that the defendant insurer should indemnify it in respect of damage by fire. The insurer said that there had been a breach of the insured’s warranty in that a door and window had been left unsecure.

Judges:

Supperstone J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 1660 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Insurance

Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.441405

Burns v Shuttlehurst Limited and McGroarty General Accident Fire and Life Assurance Corporation Plc: CA 24 Apr 1998

The insurer appealed against an order requiring it to disclose all policies of insurance and associated documents relating to the policy under which a claim was being made.
Held: A claim for an indemnity under a contract of insurance though in respect of personal injuries was not itself an action for damages for personal injuries and so no order could be made for pre-action discovery.

Judges:

Stuart-Smith, Thorpe, Mummery LJJ

Citations:

Times 12-Jan-1999, Gazette 10-Feb-1999, [1998] EWCA Civ 719

Statutes:

Supreme Court Act 1981 33(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Litigation Practice, Insurance

Updated: 18 November 2022; Ref: scu.144197

Tyrie v Fletcher: 1777

It is a fundamental principle of a contract of insurance that, if the insurers had commenced to bear the risk concerned, for however short a time, the premium paid is not returnable.

Citations:

(1777) 2 Coup 666

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Insurance

Updated: 17 November 2022; Ref: scu.244790

Sharon’s Bakery (Europe) Ltd v Axa Insurance UK Plc and Another: ComC 9 Feb 2011

The insurers refused a claim for fire damage alleging that the insured had created a false invoice for use as evidence of title in a separate transaction when seeking finance.

Judges:

Blair J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 210 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedPan Atlantic Insurance Co Ltd and Another v Pine Top Insurance Co Ltd HL 27-Jul-1994
The plaintiff had written long term (tail) insurance. The defendant came to re-insure it. On a dispute there were shown greater losses than had been disclosed, and that this had been known to the Plaintiff.
Held: ‘material circumstance’ which . .
CitedIn re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) HL 14-Dec-1995
Evidence allowed – Care Application after Abuse
Children had made allegations of serious sexual abuse against their step-father. He was acquitted at trial, but the local authority went ahead with care proceedings. The parents appealed against a finding that a likely risk to the children had still . .
CitedInsurance Corporation of Channel Islands Limited and Another v Royal Hotel Limited and others (No 2) 1998
The court was asked whether insurers could avoid a policy by reason of the creation by one of the insured hotel’s directors of false invoices intended to create a more favourable picture of the hotel’s trading performance if it became desirable to . .
CitedPan Atlantic Insurance Co Ltd and Another v Pine Top Insurance Co Ltd CA 1993
Steyn LJ said that ‘avoidance for non-disclosure is the remedy provided by law because the risk presented is different from the true risk. But for the non-disclosure the prudent underwriter would have appreciated that it was a different . . risk’ . .
CitedInsurance Corporation of Channel Islands Limited and Another v Royal Hotel Limited and others (No 2) 1998
The court was asked whether insurers could avoid a policy by reason of the creation by one of the insured hotel’s directors of false invoices intended to create a more favourable picture of the hotel’s trading performance if it became desirable to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.429637

Skandia International Corp and Commercial Union Assurance Company PLC v NRG Victory Reinsurance Limited: CA 16 Mar 1998

A fully defended foreign judgment against an insurer was binding on the re-insurer, but insurer must show that the settlement was properly entered into.
cw Exxon claimed clean-up expenses in Texas. The plaintiffs settled on the basis that they would be liable to Exxon in Texas. Excess of loss reinsurance. How should liability of plaintiffs be assessed? Relevance of liability in Texas. Liability of reinsurer. Reinsurer liable on basis of liability in Texas.

Citations:

Times 19-Mar-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 467, [1998] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 600, [1998] 2 All ER 434, [1998] CLC 920, [1998] Lloyd’s Rep IR 439

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Reversed on Appeal fromCommercial Union Assurance Company PLC v NRG Victory Reinsurance Ltd ComC 1-Aug-1995
Exxon claim clean-up expenses in Texas. Plaintiffs settle on basis would be liable to Exxon in Texas. Excess of loss reinsurance. How should liability of plaintiffs be assessed? Relevance of liability in Texas. Liability of reinsurer. Reinsurer . .

Cited by:

Reversed on appeal toCommercial Union Assurance Company PLC v NRG Victory Reinsurance Ltd ComC 1-Aug-1995
Exxon claim clean-up expenses in Texas. Plaintiffs settle on basis would be liable to Exxon in Texas. Excess of loss reinsurance. How should liability of plaintiffs be assessed? Relevance of liability in Texas. Liability of reinsurer. Reinsurer . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.143945

Ace European Group Ltd and Others v Chartis Insurance UK Ltd: CA 22 Mar 2013

The parties had each insured the assured under policies covering different risks. The Claimant insurers now claimed an indemnity or a contribution from the Defendant, the Claimants having themselves indemnified the assured. The Claimants sought to recover sums from the Defendant on the basis that the damage suffered by the assured whom they had indemnified was in fact covered by the Marine Policy, rather than the EAR policy.

Judges:

Longmore, Moses LJJ, Sir Alan Ward

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Civ 224

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Insurance

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.471954

R+V Versicherung Ag v Risk Insurance and Reinsurance Solutions Sa and others: CA 30 Jul 2007

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 807

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromR+V Versicherung Ag v Risk Insurance and Reinsurance Solutions Sa and others ComC 29-Jan-2007
A company may be able to claim for the wasted time spent by its staff investigating the matter at issue without having to show additional expenditure or loss of revenue or profit. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.258458

DKV Belgium Sa v Association Belge Des Consommateurs Test-Achats Asbl: ECJ 7 Mar 2013

ECJ Freedom to provide services – Freedom of establishment – Directives 73/239/EEC and 92/49/EEC – Direct insurance other than life assurance – Freedom to set rates – Health insurance contracts not linked to professional activity – Restrictions – Overriding reasons in the public interest

Judges:

L. Bay Larsen, P

Citations:

C-577/11, [2013] EUECJ C-577/11

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 92/49/EEC, Directive 73/239/EEC

Jurisdiction:

European

Insurance

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.471535

Society of Lloyd’s v Fraser (No. 1): CA 1998

Affirmed

Citations:

[1998] CLC 1630, [1999] Lloyd’s Rep IR 156

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromSociety of Lloyd’s v Fraser (No 1) ComC 3-Dec-1997
Lloyd’s litigation: abuse of process for names to raise fraud defence to claim for Equitas premium which could have been raised in earlier test cases. . .

Cited by:

Appealed toSociety of Lloyd’s v Fraser (No 1) ComC 3-Dec-1997
Lloyd’s litigation: abuse of process for names to raise fraud defence to claim for Equitas premium which could have been raised in earlier test cases. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.220819

Eide UK Ltd and Another v Lowndes Lambert Group Ltd and Another: CA 16 Dec 1997

Insurance broker may generally exercise a lien for an unpaid premium over the proceeds of a policy, but not over a policy of a co-assured over debt of the other assured.

Citations:

Times 29-Dec-1997, Gazette 28-Jan-1998, [1997] EWCA Civ 3005, [1998] 1 All ER 946

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Marine Insurance Act 1906 53(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Insurance

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.143404

Mitchell v Great Lakes Reinsurance UK Ltd: SCS 25 Jan 2013

The petitioners sought payment of the sum insured after the death of the policyholder. He was injured but not severely in a road traffic accident, became ill with pneumonia and died shortly. The insurers said that the cause of death was a pre-existing condition.

Judges:

Lord Malcom

Citations:

[2013] ScotCS CSOH – 14

Links:

Bailii

Scotland, Insurance

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.470719

Starlight Shipping Co v Allianz Marine and Aviation Versicherungs Ag and Others: CA 20 Dec 2012

The Alexander T, owned by the appellant and insured by the respondents was a total loss. The insurers resisted payment, the appellant came to allege improperly, and the parties had settled the claim on full payment under a Tomlin Order. The owners later began proceedings in Greece claiming what the defendants said were the same or similar claims. At first instance, Burton J gave them summary judgment for (inter alia) a declaration that the matters sought to be raised in Greece were part of the settlement of the claim and that Starlight (and their Managers) were bound to indemnify the insurers against any costs incurred and any sums that may be adjudged against them in the Greek proceedings. Starlight appealed.
Held: All the English applications/actions should be stayed because the causes of action relied on in England are essentially the same as the causes of action relied on in Greece. ‘If therefore the original English action (2006 Folio 815) and the subsequent Greek actions are related (as I think they are), it was the English court which was first seised of one of those related actions. This court, as the court first seised, has no jurisdiction to stay its own proceedings, so no question of discretion arises and issues (B)(iv) and (v) do not arise. ‘

Judges:

Longmore, Toulson, Rimer LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 1714, [2013] ILPr 15, [2013] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 217, [2013] 1 All ER (Comm) 1297, [2013] 1 CLC 123

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation 44/2001 27 28

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromStarlight Shipping Company v Allianz Marine and Aviation Versicherungs Ag and Others (Alexandros T) ComC 19-Dec-2011
Starlight had sued its insurers for payment under policies with regard to the Alexandros T. After allegations of serious misconduct were made against some of the insurance underwiters, the matter was settled with full liabiity under the terms of a . .
CitedApostolos Konstantine Ventouris v Trevor Rex Mountain, The Italia Express No 2 QBD 1992
A contract of marine insurance is not one to provide peace of mind or freedom from distress.
An assured cannot recover for losses caused by the insurer’s wrongful refusal to pay a valid claim. Interest on the sum is an adequate compensation. . .
CitedSprung v Royal Insurance (UK) Ltd CA 1999
An insured cannot recover damages at large for an insurer’s failure to pay. Interest on sums due under a policy is adequate compensation for late payment; this is so, even if an insurer deliberately withholds sums which he knows to be due under a . .
CitedGubisch Maschinenfabrik KG v Giulio Palumbo ECJ 8-Dec-1987
The claimant in Germany sought to enforce a contract by claiming the price of a delivered machine; the claimant in Italy asked for a declaration that no contract had been entered into or, if it had, that it had been discharged by repudiatory conduct . .
CitedErich Gasser GmbH v MISAT Srl ECJ 9-Dec-2003
The claimant Austrian company had for many years sold goods to the defendant an Italian company. Eventually it presented a claim before the court in Italy. Having obtained judgement, it later sought to enforce the order through the Austrian court . .
CitedTurner v Grovit ECJ 27-Apr-2004
The claimant had been employed as a solicitor by the respondent at locations across Europe, and came to claim in England that they had wrongly implicated him in unlawful activity. The company sought to issue proceedings in Spain.
Held: The . .
CitedWest Tankers Inc v Ras Riunione Adriatica Di Sicurta Spa and others (The Front Comor) HL 21-Feb-2007
A ship had foundered, and the owners disputed their insurance claim. The policy provided for arbitration in London, and one party sought an order to prevent the other commencing proceedings in another EU state in breach of the arbitration agreement. . .
CitedHenderson v Henderson 20-Jul-1843
Abuse of Process and Re-litigation
The court set down the principles to be applied in abuse of process cases, where a matter was raised again which should have been dealt with in earlier proceedings.
Sir James Wigram VC said: ‘In trying this question I believe I state the rule . .
CitedThe owners of the cargo lately laden on board the ship ‘Tatry’ v The owners of the ship ‘Maciej Rataj’ ECJ 6-Dec-1994
ECJ On a proper construction, Article 57 of the Brussels Convention on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments as amended means that, where a Contracting State is also a contracting party to another . .
CitedJohnson v Gore Wood and Co HL 14-Dec-2000
Shareholder May Sue for Additional Personal Losses
A company brought a claim of negligence against its solicitors, and, after that claim was settled, the company’s owner brought a separate claim in respect of the same subject-matter.
Held: It need not be an abuse of the court for a shareholder . .
CitedEvialis S A v SIAT and others ComC 16-Apr-2003
The defendant insurers had issued a certificate in respect of a cargo of cotton pellets which were the subject of a cif sale and had been damaged in the course of a voyage between Abidjan and Rouen. In June 2002 the insurers brought proceedings in . .
CitedGantner Electronic GmbH v Basch Exploitatie Maatschappij BV ECJ 8-May-2003
The dutch based claimant sought damages for wrongful termination of what it said was a long-term contract. The claimant in Austria claimed the price of goods sold and delivered pursuant to a number of one-off contracts to which the defendant . .
CitedJP Morgan Europe Ltd v Primacom Ag and Another ComC 5-Apr-2005
The claimant in England sought to recover a loan made pursuant to a facility agreement; the claimant in Greece sought a declaration that the facility agreement was invalid. The defendants sought a stay of the action brought against them here.
CitedUnderwriting Members of Lloyd’s Syndicate 980 and others v Sinco Sa ComC 29-Jul-2008
The claimants, insurers, relied upon an exclusive jurisdiction clause contained in a binder given to a Greek broker. It set England and Wales for any dispute. The insurers had terminated the binder alleging fraudulent conduct by the broker. A . .
CitedStribog Ltd v FKI Engineering Ltd CA 25-May-2011
The defendants sought a stay of the proceedings on the ground that there were related actions already in existence in Germany.
Held: Rix LJ said:
As to article 27, Rix LJ said: ‘where the ‘same cause of action’ or the ‘same parties’ are . .
CitedBlue Nile Shipping Co Ltd; Khalil v Iguana Shipping and Finance Inc Owners of the Ship Happy Fellow CA 25-Jul-1997
A French collision action preceded English proceedings by one of the owners to limit his liability. The parties disputed whether the fact that that owner subsequently admitted liability in France so that the only remaining issue was that of . .

Cited by:

At CAIn re The Alexandros T SC 6-Nov-2013
The parties had disputed insurance claims after the foundering of the Alexandros T. After allegations of misbehaviour by the underwriters, the parties had settled the claims in a Tomlin Order. Five years later, however, the shipowners began . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, European

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.467240

Dar v Vonsak and Another: QBD 17 Dec 2012

The second defendant insurers appealed against a refusal by the court to allow it to withdraw an admission of liability in respect of a road traffic accident. The insurer said that the fact that it now saw the accident as fraudulent was an exceptional circumstance such as to allow the change.
Held: The appeal failed. The CPR required: ‘(a) the grounds upon which the applicant seeks to withdraw the admission including whether or not new evidence has come to light which was not available at the time the admission was made;
(b) the conduct of the parties, including any conduct which led the party making the admission to do so;
(c) the prejudice that may be caused to any person if the admission is withdrawn;
(d) the prejudice that may be caused to any person if the application is refused;
(e) the stage in the proceedings at which the application to withdraw is made, in particular in relation to the date or period fixed for trial;
(f) the prospects of success (if the admission is withdrawn) of the claim or part of the claim in relation to which the offer was made; and
(g) the interests of the administration of justice.
The judge had correctly followed these guidelines and had accepted the difficulties inherent in the evidence.
The experts agreed that the best source of information would be the cars involved. The car at issue had been destroyed, removing a major element in the driver being able to dispute the serious allegation of fraud. The Judge did not arrive at a perverse conclusion. It was one that was entirely reasonable in the circumstances confronting her.

Judges:

Eady J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 3632 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 14 PD 7.2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedGurney Consulting Engineers (A Firm) v Gleeds Health and Safety Ltd Gleeds Management Services Ltd QBD 25-Jan-2006
It is not necessary for a party to seek permission to rely upon an expert’s report, when disclosed by another party, even though the court has not given anyone specific permission to do so. . .
CitedWoodland v Stopford and Others CA 16-Mar-2011
The claimant appealed against a decision allowing a defendant to withdraw an admission of liability. As a child she had got into difficulties during a class swimming lesson, and had ceased to breathe leaving her with catastrophic hypoxic brain . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Litigation Practice

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.467145

Stockwell and others v Society of Lloyd’s; Society of Lloyd’s v Henderson and Others; Lowe and Others v Society of Lloyd’s: CA 27 Jul 2007

The claimants sought to recover damages from the defendants in their alleged mishandling of their agencies. They had sought to amend the pleadings to add a claim for misfeasance in public office, and now appealed refusal of leave.
Held: the appeals failed. The House in Three Rivers had defined the tort, but there was little authority for what was meant by a public officer for the tort. Lloyds did not exercise a public office so as to bring it within the tort of public misfeasance.

Judges:

Buxton LJ, Smith LJ, Moore-Bick LJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 930, Times 09-Oct-2008, [2008] 1 WLR 2255

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedHilda Amoo-Gottfried v Legal Aid Board (No 1 Regional Committee) CA 1-Dec-2000
The claimant appealed an order dismissing her claim for misfeasance in public office by the defendant, for the way in which they had mishandled her membership of duty solicitor rota schemes.
Held: The court discussed the requirements for . .

Cited by:

CitedMuuse v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 27-Apr-2010
The claimant, a Dutch national, was detained pending deportation. He was arrested ‘for immigration’ after being given bail in other proceedings. It had been found that that detention was unlawful. He did not come within the criteria for deportation, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Torts – Other

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.259668

Toomey of Syndicate 2021 v Banco Vitalicio De Espana Sa De Seguros Y Reasseguros: CA 18 May 2004

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 685

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See AlsoToomey of Syndicate 2021 v Banco Vitalicio De Espana Sa De Seguros Y Reasseguros CA 18-May-2004
. .
Appeal fromToomey of Syndicate 2021 v Banco Vitalicio De Espana Sa De Seguros Y Reasseguros CA 18-May-2004
. .
CitedLimit (No 3) Ltd and others v PDV Insurance Company CA 11-Apr-2005
There had been substantial oil leaks in Venezuela, which had been insured and then re-insured in London. Permission had been given to serve the defendant out of the jurisdiction, but that permission had been set aside. The claimant now appealed.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.198201

Alliance Bank Jsc v Aquanta Corporation and Others: CA 12 Dec 2012

Judges:

Lloyd, Elias, Tomlinson LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 1588, [2013] 1 All ER (Comm) 819, [2012] 2 CLC 1027, [2013] 1 Lloyds Rep 175

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedKing v The Victoria Insurance Company Limited PC 20-Mar-1896
Queensland – A cargo of wool was insured ‘at and from Townsville to London’. The lighter carrying the cargo to the ship capsized in the harbour. The insurers paid out and, taking an assignment of the action sued the defendant Government. The latter . .
Appeal fromAlliance Bank JSC v Aquanta Corporation and Others ComC 14-Dec-2011
The defendants applied to have set aside the leave to serve proceedings on them out of the jurisdiction. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Torts – Other, Jurisdiction

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.467056

Burnett v International Insurance Company of Hanover Ltd: SC 23 Apr 2021

For the purpose of interpreting a contract for public liability insurance provided by Hanover (the ‘Policy’), the Supreme Court is asked to consider whether the death of Ms Burnett’s husband:
(1) was brought about by a ‘deliberate act’ within the terms of the Policy and, if so, whether Hanover’s liability to indemnify is excluded by the relevant policy wording; and
(2) was a consequence of a ‘wrongful arrest’ within the terms of the Policy with the effect that Hanover’s liability is limited to GBP 100,000.

Judges:

Lord Reed, Lord Briggs, Lord Hamblen, Lord Leggatt, Lord Burrows

Citations:

[2021] UKSC 12

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary

Statutes:

e Third Parties (Rights against Insurances) Act 2010

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Insurance

Updated: 11 November 2022; Ref: scu.662151

Brown-Quinn and Another v Equity Syndicate Management Ltd and Another: ComC 21 Oct 2011

The court heard sample claims as to the effectiveness of BTE legal expenses insurance policies.

Judges:

Burton J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 2661 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromBrown-Quinn and Another v Equity Syndicate Management Ltd and Another CA 12-Dec-2012
The court was asked as to the requirement for a client to be given free choice of a lawyer in the context of legal expenses insurance. The various claimants insured by the defendants had sought to instruct solicitors not on the respondent’s approved . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance

Updated: 10 November 2022; Ref: scu.449051

Caple v Sewell and others: CA 9 Nov 2001

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1848, [2002] Lloyds IR Rep 626

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedSeddon v Binions CA 1978
The Court gave guidance on the proper method of interpreting a term of a motor insurance policy which defines the limitations of use subject to which the policy provides cover. Roskill LJ: ‘Inevitably, where one has a phrase such as ‘social, . .

Cited by:

CitedKeeley (Widow of Terence Noel James Keeley Deceased) v Pashen and Wren Motor Syndicate 1202 at Lloyd’s CA 10-Nov-2004
The driver had driven his car at a crowd of people intending to frighten them. Instead one had been killed. The insurers resisted liability saying that the use of the car for this purpose and as it was being used as a taxi, was not use for social . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Insurance

Updated: 10 November 2022; Ref: scu.201475