header-logo header-logo

Insurance

08 August 2013
Issue: 7572 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Teal Assurance Co Ltd v WR Berkley Insurance (Europe) Ltd and another company [2013] UKSC 57, [2013] All ER (D) 387 (Jul)
 

Where an insurance had a limit, it made no sense to speak of the insured having causes of action or recoverable claims which together would exceed that limit. If the limit was US$10m and the insured incurred ascertained third party liability of US$10m in respect of each of two successive third party claims, it made no sense to speak of the insured having two causes of action or two recoverable claims against its insurer totalling US$20m.

Likewise, if its liability was ascertained at US$7.5m each claim, the insured would have two causes of action or claims against its insurer, but the second would only be for US$2.5m. The ascertainment, by agreement, judgment or award, of the insured's liability gave rise to the claim under the insurance, which exhausted the insurance either entirely or pro tanto.

Similar considerations governed the incurring of ascertained expenses where those fell potentially within the policy indemnity. An insured could forbear

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll