Insurance Law Monthly

For a decade there has been much speculation amongst lawyers and insurers as to whether the events in New York City on 9/11 constituted one event or two events for insurance purposes. An answer has now been given, by Field J in Aioi Nissay Dowa Insurance Co Ltd v Heraldglen Ltd and Another [2013] EWHC 154 (Comm).

The entitlement of and payment to, insurance brokers of commission is an area of law which is both archaic and confused. It seems now to be settled that the broker is paid by the insurers (although there is a doubt as to whether that rule applies to reinsurance) and that entitlement to commission accrues where the broker’s activities are the proximate cause of the business coming to the underwriters.

Article 101 of the Treaty For European Union prohibits any agreement which has the object or effect of preventing, restricting or distorting competition within the EU. That provision applies to insurance agreements, although there is a limited block exemption for certain forms of co-operation agreements between insurers, in Commission Regulation 267/2010/EC.

In Sealion Shipping Ltd and Another v Valiant Insurance Co [2012] EWHC 50 (Comm), Blair J determined issues of: (i) the materiality of non-disclosures; (ii) the meaning of “want of due diligence” in the context of a policy of marine insurance; and (iii) the application of an excess clause to a period of delay, giving judgment for the claimants.