We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 77

Fabrication of documents

  • Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • February 24 2010

In Yechiel v Kerry London Limited 2010 EWHC 215 (Comm) the High Court had to decide whether Norwich Union had been notified by Yechiel's insurance brokers, Kerry London, that Yechiel would be removing jewellery valued at £133,600 from a Selfridges safe deposit box for more than 14 days

High court refuses compensation for exaggerated claim

  • Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • June 17 2010

In Farid Yeganeh v Zurich Plc and Zurich Insurance Company 2009 Folio 244, the High Court found that Zurich did not have to pay any compensation to Mr Yeganeh as he had breached a condition of his insurance policy by making fraudulent claims for property lost in a house fire

Court of Appeal finds that Alzheimer's disease was no excuse for insurance fraud

  • Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • August 4 2009

In Markel International Insurance Company v Timothy Higgins, QBE Insurance (Europe) and another v Timothy Higgins 2009 EWCA Civ 790, the Court of Appeal held that the High Court Judge was correct in his finding that the defendant, Mr Higgins, an underwriting agent who suffered from Alzheimer's disease, had either conspired with others to defraud Markel and QBE (his principals) or that he had given dishonest assistance to others in breach of his fiduciary duty to MarkelQBE

Court can deprive a successful defendant of costs following lies at trial

  • Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • December 21 2009

The Court of Appeal has ruled that it can be within a court's discretion to reduce a successful defendant's costs award by two thirds because of lies told during the trial

A finding of contractual liability does not prevent a finding of tortious liability

  • Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • September 24 2010

In Omega Proteins Limited v Aspen Insurance UK Ltd 2010 EWHC 220 (Comm) the High Court was asked to consider whether a judgment that an insured was liable for breach of contract prevented a court from finding tortious liability within the same cover

High Court provides guidance on the role of the insurance broker in relation to the duty to disclose to insurers

  • Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • April 23 2010

In Nicholas G Jones v (1) Environcom Limited; (2) Environcom England Limited and MS Plc 2010 EWHC 759 (Comm), the High Court ruled that an insurance broker must satisfy himself that the duty of disclosure is fully understood by the client

Commercial Court upholds tribunal award limiting recovery under business interruption policy

  • Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • June 16 2010

The Commercial Court has upheld an arbitration award on business interruption insurance that used a "but for" approach to causation with the effect of limiting recovery by the insured

High Court rules on existence of insurance policy

  • Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • April 21 2010

In Ian Hall v (1) Newall Heating Limited; (2) AGF Insurance Limited (March 2010) unreported, the court held that Mr Hall, who is suffering from mesothelioma caused by exposure to asbestos, could not identify AGF Insurance (AGF) as being liable, pursuant to the provisions of the Third Party (Rights against Insurers) Act 1930, to satisfy a default judgment obtained against Newall Heating (Newall

Contra Proferentem principle applies to ambiguous questions in proposal form

  • Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • October 13 2009

The High Court's decision in R&R Development Ltd v AXA Insurance UK Plc 2009 EWHC 2424 (Ch) concerned the issue of whether ambiguous questions in a proposal form for a contract of insurance could be construed by following the Contra Proferentem principle without the need for the court to decide upon the correct interpretation of the questions

Application for extension of time is barred by the Court of Appeal

  • Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • August 5 2010

The Court of Appeal, in City & General (Holborn) Ltd v Royal Sun Alliance Plc 2010 EWCA Civ 911, was asked to consider whether the earlier decision to set aside an extension of time for service of a claim form (granted due to the claim being time-barred) was correct