In its recent decision Webb Operating Co. v. Zurich American Ins. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73675 (E.D.Mich. July 8, 2011), the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan had occasion to consider whether an insured under a series of consecutive claims made and reported underground storage tank policies was entitled to coverage for remediation costs where it failed to report the “claim” during the proper policy period.
A CVA was introduced as one of the rescue arrangements under the Insolvency Act 1986.
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas has held that an excess insurer did not prove that it was sufficiently prejudiced by the insured’s late notice of a claim to justify a denial of coverage.
On April 15, 2011, Justice Phelan granted a motion to re-open the trial of a patent infringement action in Varco Canada Limited v Pason Systems Corp. 2011 FC 467 in order to admit new evidence.
On April 14, the ECJ provided its judgment in joined cases C-28809 and C-28909.
As the volume of employment claims increases, so too do the inevitable delays in resolving those claims
Supreme Court decisions about ERISA cases, while infrequent, typically contain some surprises, as demonstrated most recently in CIGNA Corp. v. Amara.
The NSW Office of the Information Commissioner (OIC) was established as part of the new right to information system in NSW.
The courts do have the jurisdiction to revoke final orders but the party seeking the revocation will have an uphill battle.
The Alberta Court of Appeal addressed the effect of without prejudice offers in Mahe v. Boulianne.