header-logo header-logo

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

A hollow choice?

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll