Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Act 2010
Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Act 2010 published
Full text of Act (PDF)
Source: www.opsi.gov.uk
Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Act 2010 published
Full text of Act (PDF)
Source: www.opsi.gov.uk
“Insurers who delay paying valid claims should be liable to policyholders for any foreseeable losses they cause, a new Law Commission paper suggested this week.”
OUT-LAW.com, 25th March 2010
Source: www.out-law.com
“The Law Commission and Scottish Law Commission are conducting a joint review of insurance contract law.”
Law Commission, 24th March 2010
Source: www.lawcom.gov.uk
“More than 300 people who suffered burns from a chemical used on Land of Leather sofas will not receive compensation, the High Court has ruled.”
BBC News, 18th March 2010
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“The Government has ditched proposals for a ‘dog tax’ that would force owners to insure against their pets attacking people barely a week after the idea was first floated.”
The Independent, 17th March 2010
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“A contract’s liability cap applies to interest on payments that is part of that contractual agreement but does not apply to statutory interest applied by a court, the High Court has said.”
OUT-LAW.com, 4th March 2010
Source: www.out-law.com
“‘Access to Justice entails that those with meritorious claims (whether or not ultimately successful) are able to bring those claims before the courts for judicial resolution or post-issue settlement, as the case may be. It also entails that those with meritorious defences (whether or not ultimately successful) are able to put those defences before the courts for judicial resolution or alternatively, settlement based upon the merits of the case.’”
Law Society’s Gazette, 1st February 2010
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
“A mother whose home resembled a ‘murder scene’ after a midwife ‘randomly hacked’ at her with a pair of scissors has called for a change in the law to force independent midwives to take out insurance.”
Daily Telegraph, 28th January 2010
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“This Bill implements Law Commission and Scottish Law Commission recommendations about the rights of a third party to claim directly against an insurer.”
Ministry of Justice, 18th December 2009
Source: www.justice.gov.uk
“A proposed new law will make it easier and cheaper for people to pursue their claims directly against insurers when the insured becomes insolvent.”
OUT-LAW.com, 30th November 2009
Source: www.out-law.com
“Insurance companies were yesterday accused of profiteering from victims of the deadly asbestos cancer mesothelioma. Hundreds of victims of the disease are going without compensation because many of the insurance policies meant to protect workers allegedly have been lost.”
The Independent, 29th November 2009
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“The Law Commission and Scottish Law Commission are conducting a joint review of insurance contract law.”
Law Commission, 5th November 2009
Source: www.lawcom.gov.uk
“A fraudster who staged almost 100 car accidents and used the insurance payouts to fund a glamorous lifestyle was jailed yesterday.”
The Independent, 22nd October 2009
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“The Competition Commission must reconsider its ban on the sale of payment protection insurance (PPI) at the same time as a loan or credit, the Competition Appeal Tribunal has ruled. But the decision is not necessarily the end of the point of sale prohibition.”
OUT-LAW.com, 20th October 2009
Source: www.out-law.com
“Firms will have to review all the complaints about Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) mis-selling that they have rejected since 2005 under tough new proposals announced this week by the Financial Services Authority.”
OUT-LAW.com, 2nd October 2009
Source: www.out-law.com
“The family of a teacher killed while cycling home from his school in Greater Manchester has been awarded compensation of £580,000.”
BBC News, 28th July 2009
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Equitable Life policyholders take their claim for compensation to the Royal Courts of Justice on Tuesday in a bid to overturn a Government ruling that gives them a fraction of what they say is a fair entitlement.”
The Times, 20th July 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Privy Council
“After-the-event insurance premiums and success fees under conditional fee agreements entered into with English counsel and solicitors were not recoverable as costs by a successful party in an appeal to the Privy Council from Jamaica whose domestic law did not permit conditional fee agreements or allow for a successful party’s expenditure on after-the-event premiums to be an allowable disbursement.”
The Times, 10th July 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Seaga v Harper (No 2) [2009] UKPC 26; [2009] WLR (D) 212
“Success fees under conditional fee agreements, and premiums paid on ‘after the event’ (‘ATE’) insurance cover were not recoverable as costs by a successful party in an appeal to the Privy Council from Jamaica whose domestic law did not allow conditional fee agreements or permit expenditure on ATE premiums to be an allowable disbursement.”
WLR Daily, 29th June 2009
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Copley v Lawn; Maden v Haller [2009] EWCA Civ 580; [2009] WLR (D) 200
“Where, following a road accident caused by a defendant’s negligence, the defendant’s insurers offered to provide a ‘free’ replacement car to the claimant while his own car was being repaired, the claimant could reasonably reject or ignore the offer if it did not make clear the cost of hire to the defendant for the purpose of enabling the claimant to make a realistic comparison with the cost to him of making his own hire car arrangements. If a claimant did unreasonably reject or ignore the offer, he did not forfeit his damages claim altogether but was entitled to recover at least the cost which the defendant could show he would reasonably have incurred. The general rule that the claimant could recover the market rate of hire for his loss of use prevailed, unless, and to the extent that, the defendant could show that, on the facts of a particular case, a car could have been provided more cheaply than at the market rate.”
WLR Daily, 19th June 2009
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.