header-logo header-logo

Insurance surgery: ATE (Pt 2)

Friends with benefits: Richard Whale dispels some myths about after the event insurance

For many years, commercial litigators thought after-the-event (ATE) insurance was a personal injury phenomenon of no direct interest. But as pressure from clients over costs and risk sharing continues to increase, many have come to the realisation that this is far from true. 

The prospect of insuring against the risk of losing and then having to pay the other side’s costs and your own disbursements has considerable appeal, not only to the client with little spare cash, but also to the company that could afford to pay but wants to remove the risk from their balance sheet.

ATE is usually seen supporting conditional fee agreements (CFAs), and these are also becoming more common in the commercial world. There was a great deal of publicity around Addleshaw Goddard agreeing a CFA with Russian oligarch Boris Berezovsky for his (ultimately unsuccessful) action against Roman Abramovich. A range of other commercial law firms have also announced their

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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll