header-logo header-logo

12 January 2018 / Derek Adamson
Issue: 7776 / Categories: Features , Profession , Insurance / reinsurance
printer mail-detail

A not so simple solution

nlj_7776_adamson

Derek Adamson discusses the current issues with the Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Act 2010, & suggests some improvements

On 1 August 2016, the Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Act 2010 (the 2010 Act) came into force. This well-intentioned legislation 80 years after its predecessor of the same name (the 1930 Act) was supported by insurers and claimants as it streamlined the process for recovery of damages in long-tail disease litigation. The new statute permits an action against the insurer of an insolvent tortfeasor directly rather than restoring the insured company and obtaining judgment before being able to enforce against the insurer. The legal costs of restoration and the resultant delay would be avoided. A win-win for all… or so it seemed.

During 2017, as the impact of the new law bedded in, two issues relating to mesothelioma and asbestos-related lung cancer claims emerged. A key transitional provision is that where the insolvency event and the incurring of liability both take place before 1 August 2016, the 1930 Act continues to apply.

Issue

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll