header-logo header-logo

12 November 2010 / Rehana Azib
Issue: 7441 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

A mixed bag

Rehana Azib reports on liability, protection & limitation

The eagerly anticipated judgment of the Court of the Appeal in the Employers’ Liability (EL) Trigger Litigation was handed down last month, the results of which were rather a mixed bag.

Insurers appealed against the decision of Burton J at first instance. The judge adopted a causation approach to the construction of the insurance policies and that were in force at the date of inhalation of asbestos dust which subsequently caused mesothelioma many years later, were liable to indemnify on the basis that injury was actually sustained and disease was contracted when it was caused ie at that time and not subsequently. The appellants relied on Bolton MBC v Municipal Mutual Insurance Limited [2006] 1 WLR 1492, [2006] All ER (D) 66 (Feb) in which injury was sustained or the disease was contracted when the employee actually suffered it, which would be at the time the disease manifested itself in the form of a tumour. It is worth bearing in mind, however, that Bolton concerned a policy

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: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll