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 161

Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Confirms “Continuous Trigger” for Latent Environmental Property Damage Claims
  • K&L Gates
  • USA
  • April 26 2017

In a significant decision for Pennsylvania insurance law, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court has ruled that a “continuous trigger” of coverage

NJ Court Finds Another Piece of the Insurance Allocation Puzzle
  • Riker Danzig Scherer Hyland & Perretti LLP
  • USA
  • August 10 2016

Under New Jersey insurance law, many of the coverage issues arising under comprehensive general liability ("CGL") policies related to long-tail

Garden View Restaurant Ltd. v. Portage La Prairie Mutual Insurance Co
  • Harper Grey LLP
  • Canada
  • April 19 2016

An insured landowner's appeal seeking insurance coverage for remediation costs resulting from an oil spill on its property was dismissed. 2016 N.S

Federal court rules insurer must cover CERCLA administrative proceedings
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • November 11 2011

A federal court in Idaho has ruled that, under state insurance law, CERCLA administrative proceedings are “suits” and therefore insurers must cover the costs of dealing with such proceedings.

Ontario Court of Appeal clarifies application of pollution exclusion clauses in commercial general liability policies
  • Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • Canada
  • June 30 2011

In ING Insurance Company of Canada v. Miracle (Mohawk Imperial Sales and Mohawk Liquidate), 2011 ONCA 321, the Ontario Court of Appeal held that a “Pollution Liability” exclusion clause in a Commercial General Liability (CGL) insurance policy will apply where the insured participated in an activity that posed a known risk of pollution and environmental damage.

Insurance implications of the Deepwater Horizon disaster
  • Lathrop Gage LLP
  • USA
  • May 12 2010

The potential financial impact of the April 20, 2010 explosion and sinking of the Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico may well eclipse the financial impact of the Exxon Valdez spill in 1989, which resulted in a $3.5 billion dollar settlement and $5 billion in legal and financial settlements.

Plain language of insurance policy's pollution exclusion precludes coverage for gasoline release
  • Kelley Drye & Warren LLP
  • USA
  • April 8 2010

MDK owned a gasoline station in Goshen, Indiana.

Ruth Lawrence
  • Hill Dickinson LLP