header-logo header-logo

A hollow choice?

18 November 2011 / David Greene
Issue: 7490 / Categories: Opinion , Legal services
printer mail-detail

Does BTE insurance offer freedom of choice, asks David Greene

The increasing tendency to include legal expenses insurance in household policies highlights changes in the relationship between the insurer and the insured’s chosen lawyers. In particular, the insurer’s tendency to steer work towards its own panel has brought into question the ability of the insured to choose their own solicitor, a right guaranteed by the European Directive on Legal Expenses Insurance and the domestic regulations, the Insurance Companies (Legal Expenses) Regulations 1990. One element of that choice is the ability of the insurer to determine the rates at which solicitors instructed by the insured may be paid under the policy. The High Court has now addressed the subject in Brown-Quinn v Equity Syndicate Management Ltd & Others [2011] EWHC 2661 (Comm), [2011] All ER (D) 243 (Oct).

There has been, with the development of before-the-event (BTE) insurance (which itself may be knocked by the ban on referral fees), an increasing tension between the insurer and the insured about who should represent the insured in

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll