Insurance Law Monthly

Credit hire cases continue to be a major source of litigation. In joined cases Pattni v First Leicester Buses Ltd; Bent v Highways and Utilities Construction and Anr [2011] EWCA Civ 1384 the Court of Appeal has once again reviewed the area. The judgment of Aikens LJ signals a change in terminology and also lays down the approach to be taken where the claimant has used credit hire facilities where there was no justification to do so.

The litigation on the recoverability of the costs of hiring a replacement vehicle shows no sign of abating. In the latest contribution to the learning on this subject, Sayce v TNT (UK) Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 1583, the Court of Appeal has confirmed that there is no obligation on the victim of a road traffic accident to accept the offer of a replacement vehicle from the defendant rather than obtain a vehicle for him or herself.

Words can be slippery things. You think they mean one thing; then they are tested against an unusual set of facts and are found to mean something completely different. So public liability insurers, grateful for Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council v Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd [2007] Lloyd’s Rep IR 173 and the consequent shortening of their public liability tail in asbestos cases, must now be wondering if the wording of their policies is as clear as they thought. In the latest instalment of the so-called ‘Trigger litigation’, Employers’ Liability Policy Trigger Litigation: Durham v BAI (Run Off) Ltd [2012] UKSC 14, the Supreme Court has held that in the employer’s liability context ‘injury sustained’ policy wording responds in mesothelioma cases at the point of exposure of the employee to asbestos fibres. The case is considered by Neil Hext of 4 New Square.

Insurance policies often mitigate the draconian effects of non-disclosure, misrepresentation and breach of warranty by a variety of clauses which restrict the assured’s duty. In The Seashell of Lisson Grove Ltd v Aviva Insurance Ltd [2011] EWHC 1761 (Comm) Teare J was called upon to construe the effect of Non-Invalidation Clauses and also a clause which prevented reliance on breach of warranty which had no causal link to the loss.