Teal UK decision – order of claims – not insurer’s call

more+
less-

In Teal Assurance Company Ltd v WR Berkley Insurance (Europe) Ltd and Aspen Insurance UK [2013] UKSC 57, the Supreme Court upheld the decisions of the Court of Appeal and the Commercial Court that an insured and its captive insurer were not entitled to choose the order in which claims were paid under a tower of insurance contracts in order to maximise the insured’s recovery under its professional indemnity programme. The general rule is that the liability of insurers under a liability policy arises when the insured’s loss is ascertained by agreement, judgment or award. The policy therefore meets each ascertained loss when and in the order in which it occurs.

The Supreme Court’s decision reiterates that very clear and unambiguous wording is required if the liability of insurers is to be triggered other than in the chronological order in which the underlying claims are ascertained.  To read our London office’s update on this important case, click here. To read our previous analysis of these issues click here.


DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© DLA Piper | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

more+
less-

DLA Piper on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×
Loading...
×
×