Masood Ahmed provides a useful review of the art of recovering after the event insurance premiums in clinical negligence disputes
Sir Rupert Jackson’s recommendation to abolish the right of claimants to recover after the event insurance (ATE) premiums from the defendant was modified by Parliament in clinical negligence disputes. The recovery of ATE insurance premiums was permitted in order to ensure access to justice for claimants with meritorious claims who would otherwise be unable to fund their claims.
In the leading case of Callery v Gray [2001] EWCA Civ 1117, the Court of Appeal held that, for the purposes of recovering ATE premiums, it was reasonable for a claimant to take out ATE insurance when he first instructed his solicitors. That approach was challenged by the defendant insurers in the recent joined appeals of Peterborough and Stamford Hospitals NHS Trust v Maria McMenemy and Reynolds v Nottinghmashire University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2017] EWCA Civ 1941 in which the claimants sought to recover ATE premiums after setting their claims but before
-maryam-naaz-theo-corbett-and-rachel-carter-with-(front-from-left)-arya-vindlacheruvu-and-jessica-ashcroft.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=47f89300_1)
