- Home/Publications/Insurance Law Monthly
Jurisdiction: matters relating to insurance
The Court of Appeal in Aspen Underwriting Ltd v Credit Europe Bank NV (The
Atlantik Confidence) [2018] EWCA Civ 2590
has upheld the decision of Teare J, known at first instance as Aspen Underwriting
Ltd v Kairos Shipping Ltd (The Atlantik Confidence) [2017] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 295. There is important discussion by the Court of
Appeal of the special jurisdiction rules for matters relating to insurance in the
Brussels Regulation Recast, European Parliament and Commission Directive 1215/2012/EU.
Online Published Date:
31 July 2019
Appeared in issue:
Vol 31 No 8 - 31 July 2019
Liability insurance: third-party claim for bad faith
It is settled law in England that a person seeking to
rely upon an insurance policy to which he is not a party is nevertheless bound
by the terms of the policy, including any arbitration clause. The point has
arisen in an unusual context in Hong Kong, in AIG Insurance Hong Kong Ltd v McCullough [2019] HKCFI 1649, in which English
principles were applied. The decision was handed down by Sir William Blair,
retired Commercial Court judge and sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge of the
Hong Kong Court of First Instance.
Online Published Date:
31 July 2019
Appeared in issue:
Vol 31 No 8 - 31 July 2019
Liability insurance: aggregation
The decision of Stevenson J in the New South Wales Supreme Court in Bank of Queensland Ltd v AIG Australia Ltd and Others [2018] NSWSC 1689 provides an interesting contrast
to the decision of the UK Supreme Court in AIG Europe Ltd v Woodman [2017] Lloyd’s Rep IR 209, on
the meaning of “series” and “related” in an aggregation clause. The authorities
demonstrate that minor differences in wording can lead to quite different outcomes.
Online Published Date:
31 July 2019
Appeared in issue:
Vol 31 No 8 - 31 July 2019
Motor insurance: use of a vehicle on a road
The much-awaited ruling of the Supreme Court in R & S Pilling (t/a Phoenix Engineering) v UK Insurance Ltd [2019] UKSC 16 has proved to be something of a disappointment. The Supreme Court did not get to grips with the key causation issue and instead confined its attention to the wording of the policy itself. Wider questions as to the scope of compulsory motor insurance thus remain unanswered.
Online Published Date:
31 July 2019
Appeared in issue:
Vol 31 No 8 - 31 July 2019