header-logo header-logo

Mind (the SRA) insurance gaps

12 January 2024 / Frank Maher
Issue: 8054 / Categories: Opinion , Profession , Insurance / reinsurance
printer mail-detail
152835
A resolution worth keeping…spotting gaps in your firm’s insurance policy. Frank Maher sets out where you might slip up

It is often said that solicitors in England & Wales have the widest cover of any profession in the world due to the breadth of the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) Minimum Terms and Conditions (MTC), so how do firms sometimes find themselves facing claims for which they are not covered? Below are some examples from cases where the writer has acted for firms, most with happy outcomes.

Policy limit

Claims over the policy limit are surprisingly rare in practice, but insurers and brokers are generally reporting increasing numbers. The compulsory cover is £3m per claim for LLPs, limited companies and ABSs, £2m for sole practitioners and partnerships. Many firms have additional cover, but it will not be as comprehensive. The policy limit includes claimants’ costs; costs inflation, partly due to onerous disclosure obligations, is fuelling the problem. Perhaps the most common policy limit problem in practice is aggregation (see below).

Claim

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