header-logo header-logo

27 March 2008 / Shantanu Majumdar KC
Issue: 7314 / Categories: Features , Regulatory , Insurance / reinsurance , Commercial
printer mail-detail

A matter of some interest

Is it time to update insurance law in the light of the Gambling Act 2005? asks Shantanu Majumdar

What is the difference between insurance and gambling? Historically, the legal answer was that the insured must have an insurable interest in the subject matter of the insurance whereas the gambler can bet on just about anything so long as bookmaker and odds are available. The distinction was important since contracts of wager were unenforceable by reason of s 18 of the Gambling Act 1845 and insurance effected by an insured without such an interest was a contract of wager. Like so much of English Law, its piecemeal development by a patchwork of statute (principally the Life Assurance Act 1774 (LAA 1774) and the Marine Insurance Act 1906) and case law has meant that the result is uneven and to some extent illogical. In particular, although generalisation is difficult and imprecise:

 

  • in indemnity insurance—where recovery is measured by the existence and extent of the insured’s actual loss, the rule
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

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll