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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 261

Court ruling may require changes to material damage insurances
  • Chapman Tripp
  • New Zealand
  • May 18 2015

You may need to review your material damage insurances in light of a Supreme Court decision last week that challenges the long standing practice of


Australian TOFA implications for insurers from the NZ Sovereign Assurance Case
  • Minter Ellison
  • New Zealand
  • March 30 2015

In June 2014, a longstanding tax case, Sovereign Assurance Company Ltd and others v Commissioner of Inland Revenue (Sovereign Assurance), was


Insurance case law update
  • Hesketh Henry
  • New Zealand
  • December 23 2014

In this update, we summarise significant insurance decisions released in the latter part of 2014. Litigation arising out of the Canterbury


Court cases and arbitration
  • Holman Fenwick Willan LLP
  • Australia, France, New Zealand
  • December 10 2014

This was an appeal by Islington Park against a judgment holding that Islington Park was not entitled to recover for damage to its buildings on the


Insurance case law update
  • Hesketh Henry
  • New Zealand
  • December 8 2014

In this update, we summarise significant insurance decisions released in the latter part of 2014. Litigation arising out of the Canterbury


New Supreme Court insurance case cuts a middle ground
  • Bell Gully
  • New Zealand
  • September 4 2014

What cover is there under a material damage policy if the insured property is damaged on more than one occasion during the policy period? In a


Win to ASIC in responsible lending regime
  • Chapman Tripp
  • Australia, New Zealand
  • August 29 2014

The Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) has flexed its muscles in relation to the responsible lending regime and obtained a


D&O down under
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom
  • July 18 2014

A December 2013 decision of the New Zealand Supreme Court fundamentally influenced the treatment of competing interests under directors' and


Statutory charges, Ds&Os and defence costs a guide for the bewildered
  • King & Wood Mallesons
  • Australia, New Zealand
  • May 20 2014

In the case presented to the Supreme Court of New Zealand, the parties had agreed that insurance moneys available for Ds'&Os’ defence costs did not


BFSL 2007 Ltd v Steigrad 2013 NZSC 156
  • Hesketh Henry
  • New Zealand
  • April 28 2014

On 23 December 2013, the Supreme Court delivered a controversial decision on the operation of s 9 of the Law Reform Act 1936 on costs-inclusive